U.S. v. Colldock, CR 16-1254-TUC-JAS (LCK). (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20180622912
Visitors: 28
Filed: Jun. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 20, 2018
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Kimmins that recommends denying Defendant's motion to suppress. A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired. 1 As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence. The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate J
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Kimmins that recommends denying Defendant's motion to suppress. A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired. 1 As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence. The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Ju..
More
ORDER
JAMES A. SOTO, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Kimmins that recommends denying Defendant's motion to suppress. A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired.1 As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence.
The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Kimmins' recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F.Supp.2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
(1) Magistrate Judge Kimmins' Report and Recommendation (Doc. 76) is accepted and adopted.
(2) The motion to suppress (Doc. 70) is denied.
FootNotes
1. The Court extended the date to file objections to 11/27/17 (see Doc. 80), and no objections were filed.
Source: Leagle
