Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Willson, 15-CR-142 EAW. (2017)

Court: District Court, W.D. New York Number: infdco20170424766 Visitors: 17
Filed: Mar. 24, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 24, 2017
Summary: DECISION AND ORDER ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD , District Judge . Defendant Gregory Willson a/k/a Flip ("Defendant") is charged in 18 counts of a 46-count Second Superseding Indictment that alleges various crimes, including a RICO 1 conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d), firearm offenses in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c), various narcotics offenses, crimes in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. 1951(a), and various VICAR 2 counts, pertaining to the operation of the Kingsmen Motorcy
More

DECISION AND ORDER

Defendant Gregory Willson a/k/a Flip ("Defendant") is charged in 18 counts of a 46-count Second Superseding Indictment that alleges various crimes, including a RICO1 conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), firearm offenses in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), various narcotics offenses, crimes in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a), and various VICAR2 counts, pertaining to the operation of the Kingsmen Motorcycle Club. (Dkt. 33). Defendant is one of 16 defendants3 named in the Second Superseding Indictment, but Defendant was the only defendant charged in the original Indictment and Superseding Indictment. (Dkt. 1; Dkt. 11).

This Court initially referred all pretrial matters in the case to United States Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A)-(B) (7/29/2015 Dkt. Entry), and then upon return of the Second Superseding Indictment, the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Michael J. Roemer (Dkt. 35).

On February 27, 2017, Magistrate Judge Roemer issued a thorough Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny Defendant's pretrial motions (Dkt. 19; Dkt. 25) to the extent they sought to suppress: (1) statements Defendant allegedly made to Erie County Sheriff's detectives on October 1, 2013; (2) all physical evidence seized pursuant to a federal search warrant executed at Defendant's mother's house, 2936 Five Mile Road, Lot 4, Allegany, New York, on July 31, 2015; and (3) statements Defendant allegedly made to federal agents on July 31, 2015. (See Dkt. 510).

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the parties had 14 days after being served a copy of the Report and Recommendation to file objections. No objections were filed.

The Court is not required to review de novo those portions of a report and recommendation to which objections were not filed. Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2) ("Failure to object in accordance with this rule waives a party's right to review."). See Molefe v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 602 F.Supp.2d 485, 487 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (to trigger the de novo review standard, objections to a report "must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate judge's proposal").

Notwithstanding the lack of objections, the Court has conducted a careful review of the Report and Recommendation as well as the filings previously made in the case, and finds no reason to reject or modify the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Roemer. Therefore, the Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation. (Dkt. 510). For the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, this Court denies Defendant's pretrial motions (Dkt. 19; Dkt. 25) to the extent they sought to suppress: (1) statements Defendant allegedly made to Erie County Sheriff's detectives on October 1, 2013; (2) all physical evidence seized pursuant to a federal search warrant executed at Defendant's mother's house, 2936 Five Mile Road, Lot 4, Allegany, New York, on July 31, 2015; and (3) statements Defendant allegedly made to federal agents on July 31, 2015. (See Dkt. 510).

SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. "RICO" refers to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968.
2. "VICAR" refers to the Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering Activity statute, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1959.
3. Although 16 defendants were named in the Second Superseding Indictment, four of the defendants have subsequently entered pleas of guilty.
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