Opinion
1:20-cr-20270-GAYLES/TORRES
07-11-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SAMANTHA STEVENS, Defendant.
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DARRIN P. GAYLES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres' Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) [ECF No. 75]. On February 21, 2022, Defendant Samantha Stevens filed her second Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment (the “Motion”). [ECF No. 61]. The matter was referred to Judge Torres, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a Report and Recommendation. [ECF No. 64]. On May 2, 2022, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending that the Motion be denied. Defendant timely filed objections to the Report. [ECF No. 82]. The Government filed a response. [ECF No. 84].
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F.Supp.2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed.Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).
Having conducted a de novo review of the record, the Court agrees with Judge Torres' well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Defendant's Motion should be denied.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres' Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 75], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference.
(2) Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment, [ECF No. 61], is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED.