Reported / Citable
Background
Hector Ricardo-Martin was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States under federal law. The case was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for the taking of a felony guilty plea pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
On June 11, 2026, the defendant appeared before Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters with his counsel. The magistrate ensured the defendant understood his rights and the nature of the charges against him, as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The Magistrate Judge found that Hector Ricardo-Martin voluntarily pled guilty to Count One of the indictment—illegal re-entry into the United States—without a plea agreement. The court determined the defendant was competent to enter the plea, had been properly advised by counsel, and fully understood both the charges and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving.
The Magistrate Judge found sufficient factual basis for the plea and recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and judgment of guilt be entered against the defendant. The court noted that the defendant acknowledges potential liability for restitution. Sentencing was referred to the presiding United States District Judge for determination.
Key Takeaways
- Defendant pled guilty to illegal re-entry without a plea agreement
- The magistrate found the plea was made freely, voluntarily, and with full understanding of rights
- Conviction enters upon District Judge approval of the magistrate’s recommendation
- Sentencing to be determined by the District Judge
Why It Matters
This case illustrates the federal court’s procedural handling of re-entry convictions and the Rule 11 colloquy process ensuring that guilty pleas are knowing and voluntary. The case demonstrates the magistrate judge’s gatekeeping role in protecting defendants’ constitutional rights while processing felony guilty pleas.
The matter is now pending before District Judge Alia Moses for final approval of the conviction and sentencing determination. Parties have 14 days from receipt of the magistrate’s Report and Recommendation to file objections, after which they may be barred from seeking de novo review of the recommendation.