From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Mileto

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Sep 19, 2013
CASE NO: 2:11-cr-37-FtM-38UAM (M.D. Fla. Sep. 19, 2013)

Opinion

CASE NO: 2:11-cr-37-FtM-38UAM

2013-09-19

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FRANCESCO E. MILETO


ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (hereafter "Report and Recommendation") (Doc. #73), entered on August 28, 2013, recommending that CRE Venture 2011-2, LLC's Motion to Intervene in Garnishment (Doc. #68) filed on July 30, 2013, be granted. No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation and the deadlines to do so has passed.

In the Eleventh Circuit, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112, 103 S. Ct. 744, 74 L. Ed. 2d 964 (1983). A district judge "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge "give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party." Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F.2d 507, 512 (11th Cir. 1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, and in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. The United States does not oppose CRE Venture's intervention nor CRE Venture's garnishment of the specified amounts to which it claims an interest. (Doc. #72). Defendant has withdrawn his objection to Iberiabank's Answer to the Writ of Garnishment and has waived his appearance at any hearings on this garnishment. (Doc. #64, Doc. #71). Thus, the Court will enter a final order in garnishment as set forth below.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #73) entered on August 28, 2013 is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects.
(2) CRE Venture 2011-2, LLC's Motion to Intervene in Garnishment (Doc. #68) is GRANTED as follows:
a. Garnishee Iberiabank is directed to liquidate the Defendant's nonexempt interest in the funds held in the following accounts and disburse the funds to CRE Venture 2011-12, LLC:
(1) Ventura Gainesville Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxx3015;
(2) Wood Chase Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxx3031; account number xxxxxx3049;
(3) Confederate Point Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxx3072;
(4) Silversmith Creek Property Management, account number xxxxxx3148;
(5) Commons on Anniston Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxx3403; account number xxxxxx3411;
(6) Morningside Jacksonville Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxx3510; account number xxxxxx3528; and
(7) In the Pines Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxxx188; account number xxxxxxx196.
b. Garnishee Iberiabank is directed to liquidate the Defendant's nonexempt interest in the funds held in the Long Beach Square Property Management, LLC, account number xxxxxx3106; account number xxxxxx3114, and disburse the funds to the United States, not to exceed $33,512,199.45 on the jointly ordered restitution and $31,701,836.55 on the individually ordered restitution:
The payment to the United States pursuant to this Order shall bear the notation "Francesco E. Mileto, Case No. 2:11-cr-37-SPC-UAM" and
be made payable to the Clerk, United States District Court. The payment shall be sent to:

Clerk, United States District Court

Attn: DCU

401 W. Central Boulevard, Suite 1200

Orlando, Florida 32801
(3) Garnishee's attorney's fees and costs shall be deducted from the disbursement.
(4) The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and provide a certified copy of this Order and the Judgment to the attorney for CRE Venture 2011-2, LLC for service on garnishee Iberiabank.

DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this September 19, 2013.

____________________________

SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies:
Hon. Douglas N. Frazier
United States Magistrate Judge
All Parties of Record
Defendant


Summaries of

United States v. Mileto

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Sep 19, 2013
CASE NO: 2:11-cr-37-FtM-38UAM (M.D. Fla. Sep. 19, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Mileto

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FRANCESCO E. MILETO

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Date published: Sep 19, 2013

Citations

CASE NO: 2:11-cr-37-FtM-38UAM (M.D. Fla. Sep. 19, 2013)