USA v. Young

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF ALASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
Plaintiff, ) 3:09-cr-00129 JWS
)
vs. )
) ORDER FROM CHAMBERS
ANDREW WILLIAM YOUNG, )
) [Re: Motion at docket 170]
Defendant. )
)
I. MOTION PRESENTED
At docket 170 and supplemented at docket 186, defendant Andrew William
Young moved to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255. The motion was briefed, and the magistrate judge filed a report at docket 196
recommending that the motion be denied. No objections to the recommendation have
been filed.
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The district court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings
or recommendations made by the magistrate.”1 When reviewing a magistrate judge’s
report and recommendation in a case such as this one, the district court conducts de
128 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Case 3:09-cr-00129-JWS Document 197 Filed 09/22/14 Page 1 of 2

novo review of all conclusions of law,2 and any findings of fact to which objections have
been made.3 Uncontested findings of fact are reviewed for clear error.4
III. DISCUSSION
Having examined the file and applied the standard of review articulated above,
this court concludes that the magistrate judge has correctly found the facts and applied
the law. This court adopts Magistrate Judge Smith’s thorough and well reasoned report
and her recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law. Based thereon, the
motion at docket 170 as supplemented at docket 186 is DENIED.
DATED at Anchorage, Alaska, this 22nd day of September 2014.
/s/ JOHN W. SEDWICK
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2Barilla v. Ervin, 886 F.2d 1514, 1518 (9th Cir. 1989), overruled on other grounds by
Simpson v. Lear Astronics Corp., 77 F.3d 1170, 1174 (9th Cir. 1996).
328 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
4Taberer v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc., 954 F.2d 888, 906 (3d Cir. 1992).
-2-
Case 3:09-cr-00129-JWS Document 197 Filed 09/22/14 Page 2 of 2