Reported / Citable
Background
Hugo Torres-Paez was charged with Illegal Re-Entry in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and 1326(b)(1). On June 22, 2026, Torres-Paez appeared before the Court with counsel and entered a guilty plea to the Indictment. The plea was entered before a Magistrate Judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding United States District Judge.
The Court’s Holding
The Magistrate Judge found that Torres-Paez understood his rights, including the right to plead not guilty and be tried by jury, the right to counsel, and the right to confront witnesses. The Court found the defendant was competent and that his plea was entered freely, knowingly, and voluntarily without threats, force, or inducement.
Critically, the defendant acknowledged that his counsel had explained the immigration consequences of the guilty plea—a requirement under immigration law. The Magistrate found a factual basis to support the plea of guilty and recommended to the district judge that the guilty plea be accepted and judgment of guilt be entered.
Key Takeaways
- Defendant waived his right to jury trial and formally admitted to illegal re-entry charges
- Court confirmed defendant understood the mandatory minimum penalties and sentencing guidelines that would apply
- Immigration consequences of the plea were explained to and acknowledged by the defendant
- Plea was found to be constitutionally sound and recommended for acceptance by the district judge
Why It Matters
This case underscores the procedural requirements for guilty pleas in immigration-related offenses. Courts must ensure defendants understand not only criminal consequences (imprisonment, fines, supervised release) but also collateral immigration consequences—removal, deportation, and bar to re-entry. The explicit acknowledgment that counsel explained these consequences creates a record protecting the plea from later collateral-attack claims.
Illegal re-entry prosecutions under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 remain a priority in border districts. This recommendation demonstrates the standardized procedure courts use to validate guilty pleas, ensuring defendants have made knowing, voluntary waivers of their trial rights before final sentencing.