Opinion
No. 6:19-CR-33-REW-HAI
03-17-2020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL DAVIDSON, Defendant.
ORDER
*** *** *** ***
This matter is before the Court on the Recommended Disposition (DE #121) of United States Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram, addressing Defendant Michael Davidson's guilty plea to a lesser-included offense of Count 1 of the Indictment (DE #1). Defendant appeared before Judge Ingram on March 13, 2020. See DE #120 (Minutes). After consenting to plead before a United States Magistrate Judge and engaging in a full Rule 11 colloquy, Davidson proceeded to plead guilty. DE #121 at ¶¶ 1-2. Judge Ingram found Davidson competent to plead and concluded that his plea was knowing and voluntary; Judge Ingram further found that an adequate factual basis supported the plea as to each essential element of the charged offense. Id. at ¶¶ 2-3. Accordingly, Judge Ingram recommended the Court accept Defendant's plea and adjudge him guilty of the lesser-included Count I offense. Id. at ¶ 4.
The Indictment charges Davidson with conspiring to distribute 50 grams or more of actual methamphetamine and 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture (DE #1); Davidson pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute 50 grams or more of a methamphetamine mixture and 40 grams or more of a fentanyl mixture (DE #119, Plea Agreement). The plea, in part, is to a lesser-included offense.
Neither Davidson nor the Government objected to DE #121 within the allotted three-day period. See id. at 3. While this Court reviews de novo those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which a party objects, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), it is not required to "review . . . a magistrate [judge]'s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings." Thomas v. Arn, 106 S. Ct. 466, 472 (1985). Where the parties do not object to the magistrate judge's recommended disposition, they waive any right to review. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b); United States v. White, 874 F.3d 490, 495 (6th Cir. 2017) ("When a party . . . fails to lodge a specific objection to a particular aspect of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, we consider that issue forfeited on appeal."); see also United States v. Branch, 537 F.3d 582, 587 (6th Cir. 2008) (noting that "[t]he law in this Circuit is clear" that a party who fails to object to a magistrate judge's recommendation forfeits the right to appeal its adoption).
Indeed, Davidson affirmatively states that he has no objection to plea acceptance. DE #122 (Notice). --------
The Court thus ADOPTS the Recommended Disposition (DE #121), accepts the plea, and ADJUDGES Defendant guilty of the identified lesser-included offense of Count 1 of the Indictment. The Court further CANCELS the jury trial (previously continued generally) as to Davidson. An Order scheduling Defendant's sentencing will follow. Davidson's custodial status, per the record, remains as detained.
This the 17th day of March, 2020.
Signed By:
Robert E . Wier
United States District Judge