U.S. v. Ellsworth, 8:18CR88. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20180810a85
Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 09, 2018
Summary: ORDER ROBERT F. ROSSITER, JR. , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on defendant Liane Ellsworth's ("Ellsworth") Motion to Suppress Stop of Car (Filing No. 17). Ellsworth seeks to suppress "any and all evidence retrieved from the car in which [she] was traveling" on March 7, 2018, arguing law enforcement's stop and search of the car violated her rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. After an evidentiary hearing, the magistrate judge 1 issued a Findings an
Summary: ORDER ROBERT F. ROSSITER, JR. , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on defendant Liane Ellsworth's ("Ellsworth") Motion to Suppress Stop of Car (Filing No. 17). Ellsworth seeks to suppress "any and all evidence retrieved from the car in which [she] was traveling" on March 7, 2018, arguing law enforcement's stop and search of the car violated her rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. After an evidentiary hearing, the magistrate judge 1 issued a Findings and..
More
ORDER
ROBERT F. ROSSITER, JR., District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendant Liane Ellsworth's ("Ellsworth") Motion to Suppress Stop of Car (Filing No. 17). Ellsworth seeks to suppress "any and all evidence retrieved from the car in which [she] was traveling" on March 7, 2018, arguing law enforcement's stop and search of the car violated her rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. After an evidentiary hearing, the magistrate judge1 issued a Findings and Recommendation (Filing No. 30) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) recommending Ellsworth's motion be denied. The magistrate judge advised the parties (1) they had fourteen days to object to his findings and recommendation and (2) failing "to timely object may constitute a waiver of any such objection." Neither party objected within the time permitted.
Under § 636(b)(1), this Court must "make a de novo review of . . . specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." Absent an objection, however, further review is unnecessary. See Peretz v. United States, 501 U.S. 923, 939 (1991); Leonard v. Dorsey & Whitney LLP, 553 F.3d 609, 619-20 (8th Cir. 2009) ("[T]he failure to file objections eliminates not only the need for de novo review, but any review by the district court."); see also Fed. R. Crim. P. 59 (a), (b)(2); NECrimR 59.2(a), (e).
Based on the foregoing,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Findings and Recommendation (Filing No. 30) are accepted in their entirety. Any objections are deemed waived.
2. Defendant Liane Ellsworth's Motion to Suppress Stop of Car (Filing No. 17) is denied.
FootNotes
1. The Honorable Michael D. Nelson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Nebraska.
Source: Leagle
