U.S. v. Warren
| Decision Date | 27 September 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-7172,81-7172 |
| Citation | 687 F.2d 347 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles Earl WARREN, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Sharman M. Meade, Atlanta, Ga. (Court-appointed), for defendant-appellant.
William S. Sutton, Asst. U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Before GODBOLD, Chief Judge, FAY and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
Warren was convicted of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. All issues concern the validity of the district court's denial of a motion to suppress. The motion was referred to a magistrate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate conducted an evidentiary hearing, issued a report and recommendation that the motion be denied, and informed the parties that objections must be filed to his report within 10 days. Warren filed no objections. The district court adopted the recommendation of the magistrate and denied the motion to suppress.
The absence of objections to the magistrate's report and recommendations limits the scope of appellate review of factual findings to plain error or manifest injustice but does not limit review of legal conclusions. Hardin v. Wainwright, 678 F.2d 589, 591 (5th Cir. 1982); Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 405, 410 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc).
There is neither plain error nor manifest injustice in the fact-findings by the magistrate and no error in the legal conclusions.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Axa Equitable Life Ins. Co. v. Infinity Financial Grp., LLC
...within ten (10) days of being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347, 348 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1087, 103 S.Ct. 1781, 76 L.Ed.2d 351 (1983). Failure to timely file objections shall bar the p......
- Bio-med. Applications Of Ga. Inc v. City Of Dalton
-
Cason Enterprises v. Metropolitan Dade County
...Donald L. Graham, United States District Judge, within ten (10) days of receipt. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347 (11th Cir.1982); cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1087, 103 S.Ct. 1781, 76 L.Ed.2d 351 (1983); Hardin v. Wainwright, 678 F.2d 589 (5th Cir. Unit B 1982)......
-
Neumont v. Monroe County, Florida
...Failure to file timely objections may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings contained herein. See United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347, 348 (11th Cir.1982) cert, denied, 460 U.S. 1087, 103 S.Ct. 1781, 76 L.Ed.2d 351 May 17, 2001. AMENDED OMNIBUS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ......
-
Synopses of Briefs
...review de novo the report’s legal conclusions. See United States v. Roberts , 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988); United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347, 348 (11th Cir. 1982). On the merits, the Eleventh Circuit held that “[n]one of the examining physicians determined that Mr. Popock retaine......
-
Synopses of Briefs
...review de novo the report’s legal conclusions. See United States v. Roberts , 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988); United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347, 348 (11th Cir. 1982). On the merits, the Eleventh Circuit held that “[n]one of the examining physicians determined that Mr. Popock retaine......
-
Synopses of Briefs
...review de novo the report’s legal conclusions. See United States v. Roberts , 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988); United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347, 348 (11th Cir. 1982). On the merits, the Eleventh Circuit held that “[n]one of the examining physicians determined that Mr. Popock retaine......