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 v. Strunk

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Southern Division, London

October 29, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
DARREN STRUNK, Defendant.

ORDER

GREGORY F. VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Recommended Disposition (also known as a Report and Recommendation) [R. 51] filed by United States Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram. The Defendant, Darren Strunk, is charged with violating the conditions of his supervised release. Violation #1 charges him with using a controlled substance and, as a result, Violation #2 charges him with failing to refrain from committing another federal, state or local crime. [ Id. at 2-3.] Upon notification of the violations, the United States Probation Office issued a violations report and, in response, the Court issued an arrest warrant [R. 43] and then referred this matter to Judge Ingram to conduct a final revocation hearing and recommend a proposed disposition of the matter. [R. 47.]

On September 4, 2014, Judge Ingram conducted a final hearing and Strunk stipulated to the charged violations. [R. 45 at 2.] On September 15, Judge Ingram issued a Report and Recommendation which recommended that Strunk's supervised release be revoked and that he be imprisoned for twelve months and one day with a term of supervision to follow. [R. 51 at 8.] Judge Ingram appropriately considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3353 factors in coming to his recommended sentence. [ Id. at 6-7.] The Recommended Disposition advises the parties' that objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. [ Id. at 9.] See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). There were no objections filed during the relevant time period and Strunk waived his right of allocution. [R. 53.]

Generally, this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of a recommended disposition to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c). When no objections are made, however, this Court is not required to "review... a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard...." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Parties who fail to object to a Magistrate's report and recommendation are also barred from appealing a district court's order adopting that report and recommendation. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). Nevertheless, this Court has examined the record, and it agrees with the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Disposition.

Accordingly, and the Court being sufficiently advised, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Recommended Disposition [R. 51] as to Darren Strunk is ADOPTED as and for the Opinion of the Court;

(2) The Defendant, Darren Strunk, is found to have violated the terms of his Supervised Release as set forth in the Petition filed by the U.S. Probation Office [R. 43];

(3) Strunk's Supervised Release is REVOKED;

(4) Strunk is SENTENCED to the Custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of twelve (12) months and one (1) day;

(5) Twenty-four (24) months, less one (1) day of supervised release is IMPOSED following his term of incarceration;

(6) Strunk has WAIVED his right to allocution [R. 53]; and

(7) Judgment shall be entered promptly.


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.