Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

United States of America v. Glance Ross

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


May 31, 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
GLANCE ROSS, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Richard J. Arcara United States District Judge

ORDER

This case was referred to Magistrate Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr., pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On February 12, 2010, defendant filed a motion to dismiss counts 3 and 4 of the indictment [Dkt. No. 89]. On May 14, 2010, defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to electronic surveillance [Dkt. No. 102] and also a motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of a safe deposit box [Dkt. No. 101].

On December 14, 2010, Magistrate Judge Schroeder filed a Report and Recommendation, recommending that defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to electronic surveillance [Dkt. No. 102] be denied. On January 7, 2011, Magistrate Judge Schroeder filed a Report and Recommendation, recommending that defendant's motion to suppress search of a safe deposit box [Dkt. No. 101] be denied. On January 7, 2011 Magistrate Judge Schroeder also filed a Report and Recommendation recommending that defendant's motion to dismiss counts 3 and 4 of the indictment [Dkt. No. 89] be denied.

Defendant filed objections to the Reports and Recommendations and the government filed responses thereto. Oral argument on the objections was held on May 6, 2011.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendations to which objections have been made. Upon a de novo review of the Report and Recommendations, and after reviewing the submissions and hearing argument from the parties, the Court adopts the proposed findings of the Report and Recommendations.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Schroeder's Report and Recommendations, defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to electronic surveillance [Dkt. No. 102] is denied; defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of a safe deposit box [Dkt. No. 101] is denied; and defendant's motion to dismiss counts 3 and 4 of the indictment [Dkt. No. 89] is denied.

SO ORDERED.

Richard J. Arcar a

20110531

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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