From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Mercer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Maine
May 29, 2014
No. 2:13-cr-176-GZS (D. Me. May. 29, 2014)

Opinion

No. 2:13-cr-176-GZS

05-29-2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. CRAIG MERCER, Defendant


ORDER AFFIRMING THE

RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on May 12, 2014, his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 168). Defendant filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 170) on May 14, 2014. The Government filed its Response to the Defendant's Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 171) on May 21, 2014.

I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.

1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.
2. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Suppress (ECF No. 103) is hereby DENIED.

George Z. Singal

U.S. District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Mercer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Maine
May 29, 2014
No. 2:13-cr-176-GZS (D. Me. May. 29, 2014)
Case details for

United States v. Mercer

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. CRAIG MERCER, Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Maine

Date published: May 29, 2014

Citations

No. 2:13-cr-176-GZS (D. Me. May. 29, 2014)

Citing Cases

State v. Giardello

In addition, a signal would have alerted drivers approaching from behind, whose view of both the intersection…

United States v. Williams

The question is whether an officer is "involved" in an investigation for purposes of the collective knowledge…