Opinion
Case No. 8:20-cr-70-VMC-AEP
03-08-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. JOHNNY ORDAZ
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 79), filed on February 18, 2021, recommending that Defendant Johnny Ordaz's Motion to Suppress Evidence (Doc. # 27) be denied.
As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed and the time for filing objections has lapsed. The Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation and denies the Motion. Discussion
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994).
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 79) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. (2) Defendant Johnny Ordaz's Motion to Suppress Evidence (Doc. # 27) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 8th day of March, 2021.
/s/_________
VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE