Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Ferguson

United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Western Division

January 9, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
DANNY FERGUSON, Defendant.

          ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          JEFFREY L. VIKEN, CHIEF JUDGE

         INTRODUCTION

         On July 13, 2015, defendant Danny Ferguson filed a motion to suppress all statements and the results of a polygraph examination. (Docket 21). The suppression motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Daneta Wollmann for a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and the standing order dated June 11, 2007. Magistrate Judge Wollmann held a suppression hearing on February 22, 2016. (Docket 38). Magistrate Judge Wollmann issued a report and recommendation. (Docket 44). Defendant filed timely objections to the report and recommendation. (Docket 46). The government filed a response to defendant's objections. (Docket 49).

         The court finds the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is an appropriate application of the law to the facts presented by the parties at the suppression hearing. See United States v. Newton, 259 F.3d 964, 966 (8th Cir. 2001). For the reasons below, the court overrules defendant's objections and adopts the report and recommendation in its entirety.

         DISCUSSION

         I. Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation

         Under the Federal Magistrate Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), if a party files written objections to the magistrate judge's proposed findings and recommendations, the district court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. The court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id.

         Neither party filed objections to the magistrate judge's findings of fact. (Dockets 46 & 49). The court adopts the magistrate judge's findings of fact in accord with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

         Only defendant filed objections to the magistrate judge's conclusions of law. (Docket 46). Defendant objects to the following legal conclusions:

1. Law enforcement did not violate his right to counsel;
2. Law enforcement honored his right to remain silent once he invoked it; and
3. His statements were voluntary.

Id. at pp. 5, 8, 9. The court examines each objection in turn.

         1. Whether law enforcement violated ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.