United States v. Pleas

ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Before the court is the above styled and numbered cause. On November 1, 2024 the United States Probation Office filed a Petition For Warrant or Summons For Offender Under Supervision for Defendant (1) DANIEL JEREMIAH PLEAS, which alleged that Pleas violated a condition of his supervised release and recommended that Pleas 's supervised release be revoked (Clerk's Document No. 74). A warrant issued and Pleas was arrested. On November 12, 2024, Pleas appeared before a United States Magistrate Judge, was ordered detained, and a revocation of supervised release hearing was set.

Pleas appeared before the magistrate judge on November 18, 2024, waived his right to a preliminary hearing and to be present before the United States District Judge at the time of modification of sentence, and consented to allocution before the magistrate judge. Following the hearing, the magistrate judge signed his report and recommendation on November 20, 2024, which provides that having carefully considered all of the arguments and evidence presented by the Government and Defendant, based on the original offense and the intervening conduct of Pleas, the magistrate judge recommends that this court revoke Pleas supervised release and that Pleas be sentenced to imprisonment for TWELVE (12) months, with no term supervised release to follow the term of imprisonment, with credit for time served, and no term of supervised release to follow (Clerk's Document No. 86).

A party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation, and thereby secure a de novo review by the district court. See 28 U.S.C.§ 636(b); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). A party's failure to timely file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a report and recommendation bars that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass 'n, 79 F.3d1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en bane). The parties in this cause were properly notified of the consequences of a failure to file objections.

The hearing on the motion to revoke supervised release was held on November 18, 2024. The court, having reviewed the entire record and finding no plain error, accepts and adopts the report and recommendation filed in this cause.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed in this cause (Clerk's Document No. 86) is hereby ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED by this court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant (1) DANIEL JEREMIAH PLEAS's term of supervised release is hereby REVOKED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant (1) DANIEL JEREMIAH PLEAS be imprisoned for TWELVE (12) months with credit for time served, and no term of supervised release to follow.