Opinion
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 2:11-CR-30
12-30-2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. WOODROW JEFFERSON DAVIS, III, Defendant.
(BAILEY)
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before the Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull [Doc. 14], filed December 12, 2011. In that filing, the magistrate judge recommends that this Court deny the defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence [Doc. 10], filed November 23, 2011.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Kaull's R&R were due on December 29, 2011, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.
Upon careful review, it is the opinion of this Court that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 14] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein. Accordingly, this Court hereby DENIES the defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence [Doc. 10].
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record.
____________
JOHN PRESTON BAILEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE