Filed: Jul. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 21, 2015
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, Sr. , District Judge . This case comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge E. Clayton Scofield's Report and Recommendation (the "R&R") [138], which recommends denial of Defendant Keith Hawkins' motion to suppress statements made at the Atlanta Police Department on October 17, 2014 [90]. No objections to the R&R have been filed. A district judge has a duty to conduct a "careful and complete" review of a magistrate judge's R&R. Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 7
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, Sr. , District Judge . This case comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge E. Clayton Scofield's Report and Recommendation (the "R&R") [138], which recommends denial of Defendant Keith Hawkins' motion to suppress statements made at the Atlanta Police Department on October 17, 2014 [90]. No objections to the R&R have been filed. A district judge has a duty to conduct a "careful and complete" review of a magistrate judge's R&R. Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 73..
More
ORDER
TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, Sr., District Judge.
This case comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge E. Clayton Scofield's Report and Recommendation (the "R&R") [138], which recommends denial of Defendant Keith Hawkins' motion to suppress statements made at the Atlanta Police Department on October 17, 2014 [90]. No objections to the R&R have been filed.
A district judge has a duty to conduct a "careful and complete" review of a magistrate judge's R&R. Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 408 (5th Cir. 1982)).1 This review may take different forms, however, depending on whether there are objections to the R&R. The district judge must "make a de novo determination of those portions of the [R&R] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In contrast, those portions of the R&R to which no objection is made need only be reviewed for clear error. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).2
"Parties filing objections must specifically identify those findings objected to. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court." Nettles, 677 F.2d at 410 n.8. "This rule facilitates the opportunity for district judges to spend more time on matters actually contested and produces a result compatible with the purposes of the Magistrates Act." Id. at 410.
The district judge also has discretion to decline to consider arguments that were not raised before the magistrate judge. Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1292 (11th Cir. 2009). Indeed, a contrary rule "would effectively nullify the magistrate judge's consideration of the matter and would not help to relieve the workload of the district court." Id. (quoting United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 622 (9th Cir. 2000)).
After conducting a complete and careful review of the R&R, the district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Williams, 681 F.2d at 732. The district judge may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
The Court has conducted a careful and complete review of the R&R and finds no clear error in its factual or legal conclusions.
Therefore, the Court adopts as its order the R&R [138]. Defendant Hawkins' motion to suppress statements [90] is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
