Opinion
22-CR-2062 CJW-MAR
10-02-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CHRIS LEE ROBY, Defendant.
ORDER REGARDING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING DEFENDANT'S GUILTY PLEA
C.J. Williams United States District Judge
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On December 14, 2022, a six-count Superseding Indictment was filed against defendant and two other people. Defendant was charged in counts 1, 2 and 3. On September 15, 2023, defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Mark A. Roberts and entered a plea of guilty to count one of the Superseding Indictment. On September 15, 2023, Judge Roberts filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) in which he recommended defendant's guilty plea be accepted. The parties did not file objections to Judge Roberts' R&R. The Court, therefore, undertakes the necessary review of Judge Roberts' recommendation to accept defendant's plea in this case.
II. ANALYSIS
Under the statute, this Court's standard of review for a magistrate judge's R&R is as follows:
A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
When parties do not object to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the Court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Similarly, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 59(b) provides for review of a magistrate judge's R&R on dispositive motions, where objections are made, as follows:
The district judge. must consider de novo any objection to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommendation, receive further evidence, or resubmit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.FED. R. CRIM. P. 59(b)(3).
United States v. Cortez-Hernandez, 673 Fed.Appx. 587, 590-91 (8th Cir. 2016) (per curiam), suggests that a defendant may have the right to de novo review of a magistrate judge's recommendation to accept a plea of guilty even if no objection is filed.
In this case, the parties filed no objections, and it appears to the Court upon review that Judge Roberts' findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Therefore, the Court ACCEPTS Judge Roberts' R&R of September 15, 2023, and ACCEPTS defendant's plea of guilty in this case to count one of the Superseding Indictment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.