United States v. Morris
6:25-cr-00003
| E.D. Ky. | Jun 30, 2025Background
- Defendant Sarah Morris entered a guilty plea to Count One of the indictment in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
- The plea hearing was conducted in accordance with Rule 11, presided over by Magistrate Judge Ingram.
- No objections were filed by either party within the allotted time to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to accept the plea.
- The indictment included a forfeiture allegation concerning currency, firearms, and ammunition.
- Morris was remanded into custody pending sentencing, with her custodial status unchanged from pretrial conditions.
- The Court has deferred final rulings on forfeiture and sentencing, pending further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether to accept Morris's guilty plea | Guilty plea should be accepted and adjudged | No objection | Guilty plea accepted and Morris adjudged guilty |
| Whether to engage in de novo review absent objection | No reason for review if no objection | No objection | No review required without objection |
| Forfeiture of property cited in indictment | Property is forfeitable if Morris has interest | Not aware of specific property; no objection | Preliminary order of forfeiture entered |
| Custody status pending sentencing | Morris should remain in custody | No request for release | Morris remains in custody until sentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (holding that district courts are not required to review a magistrate judge's findings when no objections are filed)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (discussion of waiver versus forfeiture in criminal procedure)
- Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520 (6th Cir. 2019) (affirming that unraised arguments in objections to an R&R are forfeited on appeal)
- Kensu v. Haigh, 87 F.3d 172 (6th Cir. 1996) (appellate waiver for unobjected matters in magistrate review)