United States v. Ramos-Corrales

Factual and Procedural Background

This matter is United States v. Julio Noe Ramos-Corrales, No. EP:25-CR-02156(1)-LS, pending in the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division. The Court considered a Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge concerning the administration of a guilty plea. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the case was referred to the Magistrate Judge to administer the guilty plea in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The defendant consented to plea administration by the Magistrate Judge. The Court reviewed the Report and Recommendation and no timely objections were filed. The Order is signed October 1, 2025, by Judge Leon Schydlower.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the Court should approve and adopt the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.
2. Whether the Court should accept the defendant's guilty plea administered by the Magistrate Judge under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court noted the referral under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) for the Magistrate Judge to administer the guilty plea under Rule 11 and that the defendant had consented to such administration. The Court reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and observed that no timely objections were filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Finding the Report and Recommendation neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, the Court concluded it should be approved and adopted. On that basis, the Court accepted the defendant's guilty plea.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is APPROVED and ADOPTED, and the defendant's guilty plea is ACCEPTED.

Implications: The direct effect is that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and the defendant's guilty plea stands accepted by the district court. The opinion does not announce or discuss broader legal implications or establish new precedent.