Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

pleadeportationguilty plea
pleadeportationguilty plea

Related Cases

Juarez-Duarte; U.S. v.
View Case »
Padilla-Martinez v. Holder
View Case »
Lawson v. Gerlinski
View Case »
Title v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Bejarano-Urrutia v. Gonzales
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

United States v. Hernandez-Quintana

Facts

Jorge Hernandez-Quintana appeared before the court and entered a guilty plea to Count 1 of the Indictment under the authority of United States v. Dees. The court cautioned and examined him under oath regarding the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, determining that his guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary. The offense charged was supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of the offense.

JORGE HERNANDEZ-QUINTANA (1), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 1997), has appeared before me pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment. After cautioning and examining JORGE HERNANDEZ-QUINTANA (1) under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense.

Issue

Whether the guilty plea entered by Jorge Hernandez-Quintana was made knowingly and voluntarily, and whether it was supported by an independent basis in fact.

Whether the guilty plea entered by Jorge Hernandez-Quintana was made knowingly and voluntarily, and whether it was supported by an independent basis in fact.

Rule

The court applied the standards set forth in Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, which requires that a guilty plea be made knowingly and voluntarily, and that there be an independent basis in fact for the charges.

I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense.

Analysis

The court examined Hernandez-Quintana under oath concerning the subjects mentioned in Rule 11 and found that he understood the nature of the charges against him. The court determined that the plea was made voluntarily and that there was sufficient factual basis to support the charge of illegal re-entry after deportation.

After cautioning and examining JORGE HERNANDEZ-QUINTANA (1) under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense.

Conclusion

The court recommended that the plea of guilty be accepted and that Hernandez-Quintana be adjudged guilty of illegal re-entry after deportation.

I therefore recommend that the plea of guilty be accepted, and that JORGE HERNANDEZ-QUINTANA (1) be adjudged guilty of 8 U.S.C. 1326(a) and (b)(1); and 6 U.S.C. 202(3), 202(4), and 557 – ILLEGAL RE-ENTRY AFTER DEPORTATION and have sentence imposed accordingly.

Who won?

The United States prevailed in the case as the court recommended acceptance of the guilty plea.

The United States prevailed in the case as the court recommended acceptance of the guilty plea.

You must be