From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Nystrom

United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Central Division
Nov 4, 2008
Civ. 07-30100-03-KES (D.S.D. Nov. 4, 2008)

Opinion

Civ. 07-30100-03-KES.

November 4, 2008


ORDER


This court referred defendant's motion to consolidate counts 40 through 46 (Docket 103) and motion to dismiss counts 42 and 46 (Docket 104) to United States Magistrate Judge Veronica L. Duffy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

On October 10, 2008, Magistrate Judge Duffy submitted her amended report and recommendation for disposition of these pending motions. Any objections to the report were due by October 30, 2008. No objections were filed. De novo review is required to any objections that are timely made and specific. See Thompson v. Nix, 897 F.2d 356 (8th Cir. 1990). Even though no objections were timely filed, the court reviewed the matter de novo, and finds that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation will be adopted in full.

Now, therefore it is hereby

ORDERED that the amended report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Duffy (Docket 134) is accepted in full.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's motion to consolidate counts 40 through 46 (Docket 103) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss counts 42 and 46 (Docket 104) is denied without prejudice to the renewal of the motion at trial after the close of the government's case-in chief.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Nystrom

United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Central Division
Nov 4, 2008
Civ. 07-30100-03-KES (D.S.D. Nov. 4, 2008)
Case details for

U.S. v. Nystrom

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOHN NYSTROM, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Central Division

Date published: Nov 4, 2008

Citations

Civ. 07-30100-03-KES (D.S.D. Nov. 4, 2008)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Newell

There is a "surprising paucity of federal case law identifying the unit of prosecution for § 666." United…

United States v. Henderson

Hines, however, does not require aggregation. See United States v. Nystrom, No. 07-30100-03-KES, 2008…