Opinion
2:21-CR-00027-02
09-08-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ADLEY LEO DYSON (02)
JAMES D CAIN, JR. JUDGE
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KAY MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This defendant was indicted by a grand jury sitting in and for the Western District of Louisiana and charged in Count 1 of that indictment with conspiracy with other defendants to violate certain state and federal laws and regulations involving fish and wildlife transported, sold, received, acquired, or purchased in interstate commerce. Doc. 1. A Bill of Information was filed in this matter against this defendant charging him with a Class A misdemeanor involving the same conduct. Doc. 201. Defendant then consented to proceed before the undersigned with disposition of the charge found in the Bill of Information and the matter was referred by the district court. Docs. 218, 381.
Pursuant to a plea agreement reached with the government, defendant plead guilty to the charge found in the Bill of Information, his plea was accepted, and the matter was referred to probation for a modified pre-sentence investigation and report. Docs. 220, 222, 221. Pursuant to that agreement, once defendant plead to the count in the Bill of Information and was sentenced, the government would move to dismiss the charge against him in Count 1 of the Indictment. Defendant was sentenced on August 17, 2023.
In furtherance of the agreement between the government and defendant, it is RECOMMENDED that Count 1 of the original indictment, a felony charge, be dismissed by this honorable court.
Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections with the Clerk of Court. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file written objections to the proposed factual findings and/or the proposed legal conclusions reflected in this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days following the date of receipt shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking either the factual findings or the legal conclusions accepted by the District Court, except upon grounds of plain error. See Douglas v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1429-30 (5th Cir. 1996).