Source: https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-walters-42
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 08:28:59+00:00

Document:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LARRY WALTERS, Defendant.
On August 31, 2011, an Information was filed against defendant Larry Walters charging defendant with falsely altering a postal money order, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 500. On November 7, 2011, defendant appeared before Chief United States Magistrate Judge Paul A. Zoss and entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Information. On this same date, Judge Zoss filed an Amended Report and Recommendation in which he recommends that defendant's guilty plea be accepted. No objections to Judge Zoss's Amended Report and Recommendation were filed. The court, therefore, undertakes the necessary review of Judge Zoss's recommendation to accept defendant's plea in this case.
The parties have waived the fourteen day period in which to file objections to Judge Zoss's Report and Recommendation.
recommendations to which objection is made. A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.
In this case, no objections have been filed. As a result, the court has reviewed the magistrate judge's report and recommendation under a clearly erroneous standard of review. See Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting when no objections are filed and the time for filing objections has expired, "[the district court judge] would only have to review the findings of the magistrate judge for clear error"); Taylor v. Farrier, 910 F.2d 518, 520 (8th Cir. 1990) (noting the advisory committee's note to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) indicates "when no timely objection is filed the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record"). After conducting its review, the court is not "'left with [a] definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed,'" and finds no reason to reject or modify the magistrate judge's recommendation. Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573-74 (1985) (quoting United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948)). Therefore, the court accepts Judge Zoss's Amended Report and Recommendation, and accepts defendant's plea of guilty in this case to Count 1 of the Information.

References: v. 
 § 500
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.