Reported / Citable
Background
Magdiel Vazquez-Maldonado appeared with counsel before a magistrate judge and pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to Count One of the indictment. The count charged illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1).
Vazquez-Maldonado consented to enter the plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The plea agreement included a waiver of the right to appeal or collaterally attack the eventual conviction or sentence.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the Rule 11 plea colloquy, Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres found that Vazquez-Maldonado understood his rights, the charge, the possible penalties, the immigration consequences, and the terms of the plea agreement.
The magistrate judge further found that the defendant was competent and that his plea was free, knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The court recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- The ruling is a report and recommendation, not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea.
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1).
- Written objections before sentencing may be necessary to preserve review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation clears the case for the district judge’s final plea acceptance and sentencing. It also documents that the guilty plea met Rule 11’s requirements and was supported by a factual basis.