Opinion
Criminal No. 09-39-GFVT.
October 8, 2009
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the Recommended Disposition (also known as a Report and Recommendation, or "R R") [R. 21] entered by Magistrate Judge Wier on September 16, 2009. In the R R, Judge Wier recommends that the Court deny the Defendant Jimmy Darrel Gay's Motion to Suppress [R. 12]. Judge Wier further advises the parties that any objections to the R R must be filed within ten (10) days of service. [R. 21 at 17-18.] As of this date, neither party has filed objections or sought an extension of time to do so.
Briefly summarized, in his Motion, Gay argues that statements he made to police officers and evidence found during a subsequent search of his home should be suppressed. [R. 12.] Specifically, he claims that the police interrogated him in violation of his Fifth Amendment, or Miranda, rights. [ Id.] He claims that the resulting search warrant and search were the products of this unlawful interrogation. [ Id.]
After holding a hearing on the matter and receiving supplemental briefing from the parties, Judge Wier recommends denial of the motion to suppress. [R. 21.] In his R R, Judge Wier finds that the questioning of Gay was not custodial in nature, and therefore Miranda does not apply. [R. 21 at 6-9.] He further determines that Gay's statements were voluntary, and that, in light of the admissibility of Gay's statements, the judge issuing the search warrant had a substantial basis for finding probable cause. [R. 21 at 13, 16.]
Generally, this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c). When no objections are made, this Court is not required to "review . . . a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard. . . ." See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 151 (1985). Parties who fail to object to a magistrate's report and recommendation are also barred from appealing a district court's order adopting that report and recommendation. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). Nevertheless, this Court has examined the record, and it agrees with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.
Accordingly, and the Court being sufficiently advised, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommended Disposition [R. 21] is ADOPTED as and for the opinion of the Court; and
2. The Defendant's Motion to Suppress [R. 12] is DENIED.