Opinion
CR-23-02363-001-TUC-RCC (MSA)
08-20-2024
United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Herbert Wilson Coleman, Jr., Defendant.
ORDER
On July 29, 2024, Magistrate Judge Maria S. Aguilera issued a Report and Recommendation in which she recommended that the Court deny Defendant Herbert Coleman Jr.'s motion to dismiss the indictment (Doc. 33). (Doc. 42.) Defendant objected. (Doc. 51.)
When a party objects a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Moreover, “while the statute does not require the judge to review an issue de novo if no objections are filed, it does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154 (1985).
The Court has reviewed the complaint, indictment, the magistrate's R&R, and Defendant's objection. The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Aguilera's conclusions.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) Magistrate Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. (Doc. 42.)
(2) Defendant Herbert Coleman Jr.'s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. (Doc. 33.)