From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Brooks

United States District Court, W.D. New York
Apr 27, 2011
10-CR-6127 CJS (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 27, 2011)

Opinion

10-CR-6127 CJS.

April 27, 2011


DECISION and ORDER


This case was referred by order of the undersigned, dated June 22, 2010, to Magistrate Judge Jonathan W. Feldman, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A)-(B). Defendant filed an omnibus pretrial motion (# 19) seeking, inter alia, an order suppressing tangible evidence seized from 515 College Avenue, Elmira, New York and an order declaring that the Fair Sentencing Act's modification of the threshold quantities of cocaine base be applied to the subject indictment. On February 4, 2011, Magistrate Judge Feldman filed a Report and Recommendation ("R R") (#27) recommending that the Court deny defendant's motion to suppress tangible evidence, as well as his application to apply the Fair Sentencing Act to the subject indictment. Defendant timely filed objections (# 30) to the R R on March 28, 2011.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the R R to which objections have been made. Upon a de novo review of the R R and after considering the defendant's objections, the Court accepts the proposed findings and recommendation.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Feldman's R R (#27), the defendant's motion (#19) to suppress tangible evidence and his application to apply the Fair Sentencing Act to the subject indictment are denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Brooks

United States District Court, W.D. New York
Apr 27, 2011
10-CR-6127 CJS (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 27, 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Brooks

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DARREN A. BROOKS, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, W.D. New York

Date published: Apr 27, 2011

Citations

10-CR-6127 CJS (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 27, 2011)