Reported / Citable
Background
Marcos Mateo Vasquez-Raymundo appeared with counsel and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment under a plea agreement. The count charges illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
Vasquez-Raymundo consented to enter the plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the Rule 11 plea colloquy.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez found that Vasquez-Raymundo understood the charge, the consequences of pleading guilty, the possible penalties, the advisory nature of the Sentencing Guidelines, and the plea agreement’s appellate and collateral-review waiver.
The court further found that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis, and that Vasquez-Raymundo was competent to plead. The magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- This was a report and recommendation, not a final acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision by the district judge.
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- Written objections filed before sentencing may preserve issues for district-court review and appeal.
Why It Matters
The recommendation advances the prosecution toward conviction and sentencing while leaving final acceptance of the plea to the district judge. It also underscores that defendants who consent to magistrate-judge plea proceedings must timely object to preserve challenges to factual findings that the district judge adopts.