United States v. James, CV 97-37-BLG-SPW-7. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Montana
Number: infdco20191230354
Visitors: 18
Filed: Dec. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUSAN P. WATTERS , District Judge . After a final revocation hearing on the instant petition (Doc. 891), United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston filed Findings and Recommendations on December 5, 2019. (Doc. 904.) The Magistrate recommended the Court revoke the Defendant's supervised release and commit him to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of time served with no supervision to follow. (Id. at 4.) Pursuant to 28 U
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUSAN P. WATTERS , District Judge . After a final revocation hearing on the instant petition (Doc. 891), United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston filed Findings and Recommendations on December 5, 2019. (Doc. 904.) The Magistrate recommended the Court revoke the Defendant's supervised release and commit him to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of time served with no supervision to follow. (Id. at 4.) Pursuant to 28 U...
More
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SUSAN P. WATTERS, District Judge.
After a final revocation hearing on the instant petition (Doc. 891), United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston filed Findings and Recommendations on December 5, 2019. (Doc. 904.) The Magistrate recommended the Court revoke the Defendant's supervised release and commit him to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of time served with no supervision to follow. (Id. at 4.)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), parties are required to file written objections within 14 days of the filing of the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendations. No objections were filed. When neither party objects, this Court reviews the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000). After reviewing the Findings and Recommendation, this Court does not find that the Magistrate committed clear error.
IT IS ORDERED that the proposed Findings and Recommendations entered by the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 904) are ADOPTED IN FULL. The Court's judgment shall follow.
Source: Leagle
