Opinion
WA:14-CR-00189(17)-ADA
02-13-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. (17) JOHN NATHAN MCLAUGHLIN
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ALAN D ALBRIGHT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the court is the above styled and numbered cause. On October 31, 2023 the United States Probation Office filed a Petition For Warrant or Summons For Offender Under Supervision for Defendant (17) JOHN NATHAN MCLAUGHLIN, which alleged that McLaughlin violated a condition of his supervised release and recommended that McLaughlin's supervised release be revoked (Clerk's Document No. 1525). A warrant issued and McLaughlin was arrested. On February 7, 2024, McLaughlin appeared before a United States Magistrate Judge, was ordered detained, and a revocation of supervised release hearing was set..
McLaughlin appeared before the magistrate judge on February 13, 2024, waived his right to a preliminary hearing and to be present before the United States District Judge at the time of modification of sentence, and consented to allocution before the magistrate judge. Following the hearing, the magistrate judge signed his report and recommendation on February 13, 2024, which provides that having carefully considered all of the arguments and evidence presented by the Government and Defendant, based on the original offense and the intervening conduct of McLaughlin, the magistrate judge recommends that this court continue McLaughlin supervised release. The magistrate judge recommends the additional following special conditions: Defendant is ORDERED to stay at his residence of record, however, to the extent that house is repossessed or unavailable, Defendant is to stay with his father, Duane McLaughlin, in Florece, Texas or another location approved by the United States Probation Office. Defendant is also ORDERED to attend substance abuse treatment as the United States Probation Office deems necessary and appropriate. If the Defendant violates his supervised release again, he is ORDERED to appear before the undersigned for his supervised release revocation hearing. (Clerk's Document No. 1545).
A party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation, and thereby secure a de novo review by the district court. See 28 U.S.C.§ 636(b); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). A party's failure to timely file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a report and recommendation bars that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass 'n, 79 F.3d1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en bane). The parties in this cause were properly notified of the consequences of a failure to file objections.
On February 13, 2024, following the hearing on the motion to revoke supervised release, all parties signed a Waiver Of Fourteen Day Rule For Filing Objections To Report and Recommendation OfUnited States Magistrate Judge (Clerk's Document No. 1544). The court, having reviewed the entire record and finding no plain error, accepts and adopts the report and recommendation filed in this cause.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed in this cause (Clerk's Document No. 1545) is hereby ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED by this court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant (17) JOHN NATHAN MCLAUGHLIN 'sterm of supervised release is hereby CONTINUED. In addition, defendant McLaughlin shall comply with the following special conditions:
Defendant is ORDERED to stay at his residence of record, however, to the extent that house is repossessed or unavailable, Defendant is to stay with his father, Duane McLaughlin, in Florece, Texas or another location approved by the United States Probation Office. Defendant is also ORDERED to attend substance abuse treatment as the United States Probation Office deems necessary and appropriate. If the Defendant violates his supervised release again, he is ORDERED to appear before the undersigned for his supervised release revocation hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all prior conditions of supervised release are reimposed.