Opinion
Case No. 2:17-cr-042-APG-CWH
07-13-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. EDWARD ARNOLD, JR., Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT & RECOMMENDATION ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS
(ECF Nos. 38, 49)
Defendant Edward Arnold, Jr. filed a motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement officers. ECF No. 38. Magistrate Judge Hoffman entered his Report & Recommendation that the motion to suppress be denied as moot. ECF No. 49. No objection has been filed to that Report and Recommendation. Thus, I am not required to conduct "any review at all ... of any issue that is not the subject of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Ninth Circuit has confirmed that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objection has been filed. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ("[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise."); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D.Ariz. 2003) (Based on Thomas and Reyna-Tapia, "district courts are not required to conduct any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection."). Because there is no objection to Judge Hoffman's recommendation, I accept his recommendation without review.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Hoffman's Report & Recommendation (ECF No. 49) is accepted. Mr. Arnold's motion to suppress (ECF No. 38) is denied.
Dated: July 13, 2017.
/s/_________
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE