Opinion
4:23-CR-3045
05-15-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOHN FRANCIS, Defendant.
ORDER
JOHN M. GERRARD, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Amended Findings and Recommendation (filing 53) recommending that the Court deny the defendant's motion to suppress (filing 43). The defendant has not objected to the Magistrate Judge's findings and recommendation. See NE Crim R 59.2(a).
Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) provides for de novo review of a Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations only when a party objects to them. Peretz v. United States, 501 U.S. 923 (1991). Failure to object to a finding of fact in a Magistrate Judge's recommendation may be construed as a waiver of the right to object from the district court's order adopting the recommendation of the finding of fact. NE Crim R 59.2(e). The defendant was expressly advised that "failing to file an objection to this recommendation as provided in the local rules of this court may be held to be a waiver of any right to appeal the court's adoption of the recommendation." Filing 59 at 10. And the failure to file an objection eliminates not only the need for de novo review, but any review by the Court. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Leonard v. Dorsey & Whitney LLP, 553 F.3d 609 (8th Cir. 2009); see also United States v. Meyer, 439 F.3d 855, 858-59 (8th Cir. 2006).
Accordingly, the Court will adopt the Magistrate Judge's recommendation that the defendant's motion to suppress be denied, and any objection is deemed waived.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Amended Findings and Recommendation (filing 59) are adopted.
2. The defendant's motion to suppress (filing 43) is denied.