UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

United States of America

vs.

Maria Teresa Benitez-Ugarte (1)

§

§

§

§

§

NO. 1:20-CR-47-RP-1

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

TO: THE HONORABLE ROBERT PITMAN

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The Magistrate Judge submits this Report and Recommendation to the District Court 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). The District Court referred this case to the United States 

Magistrate Judge for the taking of the defendant’s felony guilty plea and for her allocution 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.

On April 16, 2021, the defendant and counsel appeared before the Magistrate Judge. In the 

interests of justice, the plea hearing was conducted by video teleconference due to the exigent 

circumstances created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Both parties consented to proceed by video 

teleconference, and the defendant, her attorney, the attorney for the Government, and an 

interpreter were present throughout the hearing. Counsel were admonished as required by the 

Due Process Protection Act. The Magistrate Judge finds that the video teleconference was 

sufficient to assess the voluntariness of the plea proceeding, as well as the defendant’s credibility 

and understanding. 

The undersigned addressed the defendant personally in open court, informed her of the 

admonishments under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and determined that 

she understood those admonishments. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the defendant pled guilty to 

Case 1:20-cr-00047-RP Document 347 Filed 04/16/21 Page 1 of 3
one count of conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of methamphetamine, in violation of 

21 U.S.C. § 846 and 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). 

The Magistrate Judge finds the following:

1. The defendant, with the advice of her attorney, consented to enter this guilty plea 

before the Magistrate Judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the District 

Judge;

2. The defendant fully understands the nature of the charge against her and possible 

penalties;

3. The defendant understands her constitutional and statutory rights, understands that 

her constitutional and statutory rights can be waived, and understands the meaning 

and effect of the waiver of her constitutional and statutory rights;

4. The defendant waived prosecution by indictment;

5. The defendant’s plea was made freely and voluntarily;

6. The defendant is competent to enter this plea of guilty; and

7. There is a factual basis for this plea. 

RECOMMENDATION

The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District Court accept the defendant’s guilty 

plea and, after reviewing the presentence investigation report, enter a Final Judgment of guilt 

against her.

WARNING

The parties may file objections to this Report and Recommendation. A party filing objections 

must specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which objections are being 

made. The District Court need not consider frivolous, conclusive, or general objections. See

Battle v. United States Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987). A party’s failure to 

file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations contained within this 

Report within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Report shall bar that party 

Case 1:20-cr-00047-RP Document 347 Filed 04/16/21 Page 2 of 3
from de novo review by the District Court of the proposed findings and recommendations and, 

except on grounds of plain error, shall bar the party from appellate review of proposed factual 

findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court to which no objections were filed. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-53, 106 S. Ct. 466, 472-74 

(1985); Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

SIGNED on April 16, 2021.

SUSAN HIGHTOWER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cr-00047-RP Document 347 Filed 04/16/21 Page 3 of 3