Order Accepting Report and Recommendation — United States v. Kaeding (Dkt. 185, D. Minn.)

Summary

An order by Eric C. Tostrud of the United States District Court accepting the report and recommendation in United States v. Harold Bennie Kaeding, File No. 21-cr-169 (ECT/JFD), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, filed February 14, 2024 as Doc. 185. Finding no clear error, the court accepts the magistrate judge's report [ECF No. 171]. It denies the defendant's amended motion to suppress statements [ECF No. 77], his motion to suppress evidence from the search and seizure [ECF No. 78], and his motion to suppress evidence obtained by grand jury subpoena duces tecum [ECF No. 74].

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD          Doc. 185     Filed 02/14/24     Page 1 of 2



                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                               DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA


United States of America,                                 File No. 21-cr-169 (ECT/JFD)

               Plaintiff,

v.                                                      ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT
                                                         AND RECOMMENDATION
Harold Bennie Kaeding,

              Defendant.
    ________________________________________________________________________

        Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation on

December 11, 2023. ECF No. 171. No party has timely objected to that Report and

Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);

Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).1

        Finding no clear error, and based on all the files, records, and proceedings in the above-

captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

        1.     The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 171] is ACCEPTED; and

        2.     Defendant’s Amended Motion to Suppress Statements [ECF No. 77] is

DENIED;




1
       Defendant Harold Bennie Kaeding requested and obtained one extension of time to file
objections to the Report and Recommendation. See ECF Nos. 173, 174. He filed a second
extension request that was denied. See ECF Nos. 177–178, 180. But Mr. Kaeding did not
timely object to the Report and Recommendation. It is true that Mr. Kaeding filed an untimely
objection. ECF No. 182. Because these objections were untimely, they will not be
considered. Regardless, if Mr. Kaeding’s objections were considered, they give no reason to
think that the Report and Recommendation might be flawed or would not withstand de novo
review.

       CASE 0:21-cr-00169-ECT-JFD      Doc. 185    Filed 02/14/24    Page 2 of 2



      3.    Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence Obtained as a Result of Search and

Seizure [ECF No. 78] is DENIED; and

      4.    Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence Obtained by Grand Jury Subpoena

Duces Tecum [ECF No. 74] is DENIED.


Dated: February 14, 2024              s/ Eric C. Tostrud
                                      Eric C. Tostrud
                                      United States District Court




                                          2

File and source

File

uscourts-mnd-0-21-cr-00169-6.pdf

Size

190,502 bytes

SHA-256

d9e83dfd008a81f58c69ee5fd4166b0e896396ad0a341f3cc7011e2cfdb36f74

Our copy

uscourts-mnd-0-21-cr-00169-6.pdf