U.S. v. Acosta

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALEJANDRO ACOSTA, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division

Date published: Dec 19, 2007

No. CR 07-0070 (N.D. Iowa Dec. 19, 2007)

Opinion

No. CR 07-0070.

December 19, 2007

ORDER REGARDING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING DEFENDANT'S GUILTY PLEAS

LINDA READE, District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

On September 25, 2007, a three-count Superseding Indictment was returned against the defendant Alejandro Acosta. On December 4, 2007, the defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Jon S. Scoles and entered pleas of guilty to Counts 1 and 3 of the Superseding Indciment. On December 4, 2007, Judge Scoles filed a Report and Recommendation in which he recommended that defendant's guilty pleas be accepted. No objections to Judge Scoles' Report and Recommendation were filed. The court, therefore, undertakes the necessary review of Judge Scoles' recommendation to accept defendant's pleas in this case.

II. ANALYSIS

Pursuant to statute, this court's standard of review for a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation 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). Similarly, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides for review of a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation on dispositive motions and prisoner petitions, where objections are made, as follows:

The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objection has been made in accordance with this rule. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended decision, receive further evidence, or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.

FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).

In this case, no objections have been filed, and it appears to the court upon review of Judge Scoles' findings and conclusions, that there is no ground to reject or modify them. Therefore, the court accepts Judge Scoles' Report and Recommendation of December 4, 2007, and accepts defendant's pleas of guilty in this case to Counts 1 and 3 of the Superseding Indictment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.