Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-1_15-cr-00498/USCOURTS-almd-1_15-cr-00498-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
William Brian James
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) Case No.: 1:15-CR-498-WKW

)

WILLIAM BRIAN JAMES )

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

The defendant, William Brian James, was charged by felony Information on 

November 3, 2015, with using electronic mail and internet websites to cause “substantial 

emotional distress to the victim and place[] her in reasonable fear of death or serious 

bodily injury” in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2)(A). (Doc. 1) Pending before this 

Court is the Government’s Oral Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6).

The Court held a hearing on November 12, 2015, during which James made his 

initial appearance on the charge in the Information. See Doc. 6. Based on the 

representations made to the Court during that hearing, and for the reasons set forth herein, 

the undersigned Magistrate Judge recommends that the Government’s Oral Motion to 

Dismiss (Doc. 6) be GRANTED.

II. DISCUSSION

On November 12, 2015, this Court held a hearing during which the Court advised 

James of his right to indictment by a Grand Jury, and James invoked this right. See FED.

R. CRIM. P. 7(b). On the basis of James’ refusal to waive his right to Grand Jury 

Case 1:15-cr-00498-WKW-GMB Document 8 Filed 11/13/15 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

indictment, the Government orally moved to dismiss the Information. James, through 

counsel, indicated he has no objection to the Government’s motion. The court finds that 

the Government’s proffered basis for dismissing the Information is appropriate and in the 

interests of justice, and thus recommends the Government be granted leave to dismiss the 

Information pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 48(a).

III. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that the 

Government be given leave to dismiss the Information, that the Government’s Oral 

Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6) be GRANTED, and that the Information be dismissed 

without prejudice.

It is further ORDERED that the parties file any objections to this 

Recommendation on or before November 30, 2015. Any objections filed must 

specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation to which the 

party is objecting. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by 

the District Court. The parties are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order 

of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in 

the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the 

District Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on 

appeal factual findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except 

Case 1:15-cr-00498-WKW-GMB Document 8 Filed 11/13/15 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 

(5th Cir. 1982); see Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982); see 

also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981, en banc) (adopting as 

binding precedent all of the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to 

the close of business on September 30, 1981).

DONE this 13th day of November, 2015.

/s/ Gray M. Borden

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cr-00498-WKW-GMB Document 8 Filed 11/13/15 Page 3 of 3