USA v. Munoz-Del Cid

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO DIVISION
USA
vs.
(1) SANDRA ELIZABETH MUNOZ-DEL
CID
§
§
§
§
§
NO: EP:26-CR-02188(1)-DB
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
UPON DEFENDANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY
On this 9th day of October, 2026, the Defendant and counsel appeared before the Court.
After being admonished as required by Rule 11, Fed.R.Crim.P., the Defendant pled guilty to the
Indictment charging her in Count One with False Personation in Immigration Matters, in
violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1546.
Accordingly, the Court makes the following findings:
1. The Defendant has consented to the entry of a guilty plea before a Magistrate
Judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding United States
District Judge.
2. The Defendant fully understands the oath and the consequences of failing to tell
the truth at the plea hearing.
3. The Defendant fully understands the right to plead “not guilty” and to be tried by a
jury.
4. The Defendant fully understands the right to be represented by counsel at trial and
at every other stage of the proceeding.
5. The Defendant fully understands the right to a trial and that if the Defendant were
to elect to go to trial, the Defendant would have the right to confront and
Case 3:26-cr-02188-DB Document 17 Filed 10/09/26 Page 1 of 3

cross-examine adverse witnesses, to be protected from compelled
self-incrimination, to testify and present evidence, and to compel the attendance of
witnesses.
6. The Defendant fully understands that if the guilty plea is accepted, there will not
be a trial in this case.
7. The Defendant fully understands the nature of the charge, the immigration
consequences, and the maximum possible penalties, including any imprisonment,
applicable mandatory minimum penalties, fine, term of supervised release, as well
as any forfeiture or restitution. The defendant also understands the court’s
obligation to impose a special assessment.
8. The Defendant fully understands that in determining sentence, the sentencing
court will consider the applicable Sentencing Guidelines, including any departures
that might be applicable, as well as the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. §
3553(a). The Defendant also fully understands that although the sentencing court
will consider the applicable sentencing guidelines, they are advisory in nature.
9. The Defendant’s plea was not induced by any promises, and the Defendant’s plea
was not induced by any threats, force or threats of force.
10. The Defendant acknowledged that defense counsel explained the immigration
consequences of the plea of guilty.
11. The Defendant is competent to enter a plea.
12. The Defendant’s plea is made freely, knowingly, and voluntarily.
13. There is a factual basis to support the plea of guilty.
Case 3:26-cr-02188-DB Document 17 Filed 10/09/26 Page 2 of 3

RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended to the district judge that the Defendant’s plea
of guilty be accepted and that a judgment of guilt be entered.
SIGNED and ENTERED this 9th day of October, 2026.
______________________________
ROBERT F. CASTANEDA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE
FAILURE TO FILE WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION CONTAINED IN THE FOREGOING REPORT, PRIOR TO
SENTENCING, MAY BAR DE NOVO DETERMINATION BY THE DISTRICT JUDGE
OF AN ISSUE COVERED HEREIN AND SHALL BAR APPELLATE REVIEW OF
SUCH FACTUAL FINDINGS AS MAY BE ACCEPTED OR ADOPTED BY THE
DISTRICT JUDGE.
Case 3:26-cr-02188-DB Document 17 Filed 10/09/26 Page 3 of 3