Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Ellis, 1:19-cr-20400-UU/JJO. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. Florida Number: infdco20191107b96 Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER ON MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION URSULA UNGARO , District Judge . THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendants' Joint Motion to Suppress Evidence (D.E. 33) (the "Motion"). THE COURT has reviewed the Motion and pertinent parts of the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. This matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan who, on October 15, 2019, following an evidentiary hearing, issued a Report (D.E. 58) (the "Report") recommending that
More

ORDER ON MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendants' Joint Motion to Suppress Evidence (D.E. 33) (the "Motion").

THE COURT has reviewed the Motion and pertinent parts of the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.

This matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan who, on October 15, 2019, following an evidentiary hearing, issued a Report (D.E. 58) (the "Report") recommending that the Motion be DENIED for the following reasons: (1) under United States v. Alfaro-Moncada, 607 F.3d 720 (11th Cir. 2010), reasonable suspicion is not required to search a cruise ship passenger's cabin; and (2) even if reasonable suspicion is required, it existed in this case when U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) conducted a routine search of Defendants' cruise ship cabin based on Defendants' age, residence, marital status, criminal history, and having booked the cruise late, and smelled marijuana in Defendants' room upon arriving to search it.

Defendants did not file objections to the Report. See LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 750 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988) (holding that failure to file timely objections bars the parties from attacking factual findings on appeal).

Upon de novo review, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge O'Sullivan's recommendations and concurs in all his findings. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report, D.E. 58, is RATIFIED, ADOPTED, and AFFIRMED. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Joint Motion to Suppress, D.E. 33, is DENIED.

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