Reported / Citable
Background
Miguel Angel Ramirez-De Leon appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for a felony guilty-plea proceeding. The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge under a general order for the taking of a felony guilty plea.
After Rule 11 admonishments, Ramirez-De Leon consented to having the magistrate judge take his plea. He pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment, charging illegal reentry into the United States.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Ramirez-De Leon understood the charge, potential penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights; that he knowingly and voluntarily waived those rights; and that he was competent to plead guilty.
The magistrate judge further found that the plea was voluntary and supported by a sufficient factual basis. The report found Ramirez-De Leon guilty of the charged offense and recommended that the district judge accept the plea and enter a judgment of guilt. Sentencing was referred to the presiding district judge.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 plea requirements satisfied, including competency, voluntariness, and a factual basis.
- The filing is a recommendation: the district judge was asked to accept the plea and later sentence the defendant.
Why It Matters
The decision reflects the magistrate-judge plea process in a federal felony case: with the defendant’s consent, a magistrate judge may conduct the plea colloquy and issue findings and a recommendation, while the district judge retains responsibility for accepting the recommendation and imposing sentence.
The parties had 14 days to object to the report and recommendation; absent objections, the report warned that appellate challenges to accepted findings and conclusions would generally be limited to plain error.