Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

USA v. Acuna, CR 16-01255-002-TUC-JAS (DTF). (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Arizona Number: infdco20171222b44 Visitors: 26
Filed: Dec. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 21, 2017
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommends that the Court deny Defendant's motion to suppress, (Docs. 558, 599, and 627). As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the Defendant's motion to suppress, (Docs. 558, 599, and 627), the objections are denied. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
More

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommends that the Court deny Defendant's motion to suppress, (Docs. 558, 599, and 627). As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the Defendant's motion to suppress, (Docs. 558, 599, and 627), the objections are denied.1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

(1) Magistrate Judge Ferraro's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 647) is accepted and adopted.

(2) Defendant's motion to suppress, (Docs. 558, 599, and 627) is denied.

FootNotes


1. The Court reviews de novo the objected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b). The Court reviews for clear error the unobjected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation. See Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F.Supp.2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer