Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Colwell, 6:19-CR-11-REW-HAI. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. Kentucky Number: infdco20190515e59 Visitors: 11
Filed: May 14, 2019
Latest Update: May 14, 2019
Summary: ORDER ROBERT E. WIER , District Judge . After conducting proceedings under Rule 11, see DE 30 (Minute Entry), Judge Ingram recommended that the undersigned accept Ronnie Colwell's guilty plea and adjudge him guilty of Indictment Count 1. See DE 31 (Recommended Disposition); see also DE 33 (Plea Agreement). Judge Ingram informed Defendant of his "right to object" to these recommendations and "to secure de novo review from" the undersigned. DE 31, at 2-3. Judge Ingram imposed a 3-day de
More

ORDER

After conducting proceedings under Rule 11, see DE 30 (Minute Entry), Judge Ingram recommended that the undersigned accept Ronnie Colwell's guilty plea and adjudge him guilty of Indictment Count 1. See DE 31 (Recommended Disposition); see also DE 33 (Plea Agreement). Judge Ingram informed Defendant of his "right to object" to these recommendations and "to secure de novo review from" the undersigned. DE 31, at 2-3. Judge Ingram imposed a 3-day deadline for any such objection. See id. at 3. That deadline has passed, and neither Defendant nor the United States has objected.

The Court is not required to "review . . . a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings." Thomas v. Arn, 106 S.Ct. 466, 472 (1985); see also United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981) (holding that a failure to file objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation waives the right to appellate review); Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2)-(3) (limiting de novo review duty to "any objection" filed); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (limiting de novo review duty to "those portions" of the recommendation "to which objection is made").

The Court thus, with no objection from any party and on full review of the record, ADOPTS DE 31, ACCEPTS Colwell's guilty plea, and ADJUDGES him guilty of Indictment Count 1. The Court will issue a separate sentencing order.1

FootNotes


1. At the hearing, Judge Ingram remanded Colwell to custody. See DE 30. The Court, thus, need not further address detention, at this time.
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