U.S. v. SCHARSCHELL, 14-00116-01-CR-W-GAF. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Missouri
Number: infdco20150217c65
Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 13, 2015
Summary: ORDER GARY A. FENNER, District Judge. Now pending before the Court is defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence With Suggestions in Support (Doc. #26). On December 10, 2014, Chief United States Magistrate Judge Sarah W. Hays conducted an evidentiary hearing on defendant's motion to suppress. On January 30, 2015, Judge Hays issued her Report and Recommendation (Doc. #38). On February 12, 2015, defendant's Objections to Report and Recommendation (Doc. #41) were filed. Upon careful and independen
Summary: ORDER GARY A. FENNER, District Judge. Now pending before the Court is defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence With Suggestions in Support (Doc. #26). On December 10, 2014, Chief United States Magistrate Judge Sarah W. Hays conducted an evidentiary hearing on defendant's motion to suppress. On January 30, 2015, Judge Hays issued her Report and Recommendation (Doc. #38). On February 12, 2015, defendant's Objections to Report and Recommendation (Doc. #41) were filed. Upon careful and independent..
More
ORDER
GARY A. FENNER, District Judge.
Now pending before the Court is defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence With Suggestions in Support (Doc. #26). On December 10, 2014, Chief United States Magistrate Judge Sarah W. Hays conducted an evidentiary hearing on defendant's motion to suppress. On January 30, 2015, Judge Hays issued her Report and Recommendation (Doc. #38). On February 12, 2015, defendant's Objections to Report and Recommendation (Doc. #41) were filed.
Upon careful and independent review of the pending motion and suggestions in support thereof, defendant's objections to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, as well as the applicable law, this Court hereby adopts and incorporates as its own Opinion and Order the Report and Recommendation of Chief United States Magistrate Judge Sarah W. Hays.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence (Doc. #26) is OVERRULED and DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
