Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. AKRAMOV, 4:11 CR 436 RWS. (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri Number: infdco20120217979 Visitors: 7
Filed: Feb. 08, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 08, 2012
Summary: ORDER RODNEY W. SIPPEL, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on defendant Kamoliddin Akramov's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b), the defendant's Motions to Suppress Statement and Evidence were referred to United States Magistrate Judge Thomas C. Mummert, III. On December 13, 2011 the United States Attorney filed a Response to Defendant's Motion. Judge Mummert held an evidentiary hearing on December 16, 2011. Judge Mumme
More

ORDER

RODNEY W. SIPPEL, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on defendant Kamoliddin Akramov's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the defendant's Motions to Suppress Statement and Evidence were referred to United States Magistrate Judge Thomas C. Mummert, III. On December 13, 2011 the United States Attorney filed a Response to Defendant's Motion. Judge Mummert held an evidentiary hearing on December 16, 2011. Judge Mummert issued his Memorandum, Report and Recommendations on December 30, 2011. Judge Mummert recommended that Defendant's Motion to Suppress Statements and Evidence be denied. On January 13, 2012 the Defendant filed his objections to Judge Mummert's Report and Recommendation.

I have conducted a de novo review of the parties written pleadings and the evidentiary hearing.

After fully considering the motion, the evidentiary hearing and the Report and Recommendation, I will adopt and sustain the thorough reasoning of Judge Mummert as set forth in his recommended rulings.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [#39] is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Kamoliddin Akramov's Motion to Suppress Statements and Evidence [#27] is denied.

As previously ordered, the jury trial in this matter remains set for Monday, March 5. 2012 at 9:00 a.m.

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