United States v. Navarro, CR 18-2106-TUC-JAS (EJM). (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20190819941
Visitors: 5
Filed: Aug. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 16, 2019
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Markovich. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Markovich recommends granting Defendant's motion to suppress (Doc. 76). As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motion to suppress, the objections are denied. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) Magistrate Judge Markovich's Report and Recommendation (
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Markovich. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Markovich recommends granting Defendant's motion to suppress (Doc. 76). As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motion to suppress, the objections are denied. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) Magistrate Judge Markovich's Report and Recommendation (D..
More
ORDER
JAMES A. SOTO, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Markovich. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Markovich recommends granting Defendant's motion to suppress (Doc. 76). As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motion to suppress, the objections are denied.1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
(1) Magistrate Judge Markovich's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 105) is accepted and adopted.
(2) Defendant's motion to suppress (Doc. 76) is granted on the grounds specified in the Report and Recommendation.
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. Civ. P. 72(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
