Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. FAYAD, 14-20417. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20160128e24 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jan. 27, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2016
Summary: ORDER REGARDING OUTSTANDING MOTIONS AND OBJECTIONS VICTORIA A. ROBERTS , District Judge . Defendants Thomas Mackey, Kenneth Green, Alan Clemons, John Fayad, Douglas Demaria, Urban Hotts, Theodore Lasater, Joseph Melcher, and David Milazzo were indicted on charges related to their alleged participation in an illegal gambling operation. All Defendants pled guilty, except for Fayad and Melcher; they intend to proceed to trial. The Court now resolves the three pending matters involving these
More

ORDER REGARDING OUTSTANDING MOTIONS AND OBJECTIONS

Defendants Thomas Mackey, Kenneth Green, Alan Clemons, John Fayad, Douglas Demaria, Urban Hotts, Theodore Lasater, Joseph Melcher, and David Milazzo were indicted on charges related to their alleged participation in an illegal gambling operation. All Defendants pled guilty, except for Fayad and Melcher; they intend to proceed to trial.

The Court now resolves the three pending matters involving these two defendants, all of which were referred to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand for disposition:

1) Defendant Melcher's Motion to Suppress Statements and Admissions for the Reason he was Not Advised of His Miranda Rights (Dkt. No. 141); 2) Defendant Kenneth Green's Motion to Suppress Electronic Surveillance Because of the Failure to Establish an Adequate Showing of "Necessity" as Mandated by the Statute (Dkt. No. 106), joined by Defendants Fayad (Dkt. No. 176) and Melcher (Dkt. Nos. 111, 166); and 3) Defendant John Fayad's Objections to Magistrate's Order (Dkt. No. 162) Denying Various Motions by Defendant John Fayad (Dkt. No. 169), joined by Defendant Melcher (Dkt. No. 143).

Magistrate Judge Grand issued a Report and Recommendation on each of the first two motions, which were fully briefed, recommending the Court deny Defendants' motions. Defendants filed objections and the United States responded.

The Court reviews de novo objections to any part of a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). After considering the entire record, the Court ACCEPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 159) for Defendant Melcher's motion to suppress statements allegedly obtained in violation of his Miranda rights; Defendant Melcher's Motion (Dkt. No. 141) is DENIED. The Court also ACCEPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 161) for Defendant Green's motion to suppress evidence for failure to comply with the wiretap authorization statute (Dkt. No. 106). The motion and subsequent notices of joinder are DENIED.

The third matter before the Court is a series of objections made by Defendant Fayad to Magistrate Judge Grand's orders regarding discovery. The Court reviews a magistrate judge's non-dispositive orders with a deferential lens; a district judge may modify or set aside an order if it is "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). After reviewing the motions addressed in Magistrate Judge Grand's Order (Dkt. No. 162) along with the associated objections, the Court UPHOLDS Magistrate Judge Grand's Order denying the motions.

IT IS ORDERED.

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