U.S. v. DUDLEY, 15-34-ART-CJS. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Kentucky
Number: infdco20160408g84
Visitors: 164
Filed: Apr. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER AMUL R. THAPAR , District Judge . Antoine Dudley is charged with distributing heroin and fentanyl, a controlled substance. R. 38 (sealed superseding indictment). Dudley asked the Court to exclude testimony from a confidential informant ("CI") who allegedly purchased controlled substances from him. R. 23 at 2. As grounds, Dudley argued that the CI is not competent to testify. Id. Magistrate Judge Candace Smith issued a thoughtful Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), denying Dudley's m
Summary: ORDER AMUL R. THAPAR , District Judge . Antoine Dudley is charged with distributing heroin and fentanyl, a controlled substance. R. 38 (sealed superseding indictment). Dudley asked the Court to exclude testimony from a confidential informant ("CI") who allegedly purchased controlled substances from him. R. 23 at 2. As grounds, Dudley argued that the CI is not competent to testify. Id. Magistrate Judge Candace Smith issued a thoughtful Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), denying Dudley's mo..
More
ORDER
AMUL R. THAPAR, District Judge.
Antoine Dudley is charged with distributing heroin and fentanyl, a controlled substance. R. 38 (sealed superseding indictment). Dudley asked the Court to exclude testimony from a confidential informant ("CI") who allegedly purchased controlled substances from him. R. 23 at 2. As grounds, Dudley argued that the CI is not competent to testify. Id.
Magistrate Judge Candace Smith issued a thoughtful Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), denying Dudley's motion. R. 44. Judge Smith found that the information Dudley provided about the CI's competency did not justify (a) holding a witness competency hearing, (b) ordering a competency evaluation, or (c) excluding the CI's testimony. Id. at 1, 5 (citing, inter alia, Fed. R. Evid. 601 and United States v. Phibbs, 999 F.2d 1053, 1068 (6th Cir. 1993)). Dudley had 14 days to file any objections to the R&R. Id. at 6-7; Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b). Dudley did not file any objections by the deadline. Therefore, Dudley has waived any objection. Id.
Accordingly it is ORDERED that Judge Smith's R&R, R. 44, is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. Dudley's motion to exclude the CI's testimony, R. 23, is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
