United States v. MacIas-ovalle
This text of 432 F. App'x 710 (United States v. MacIas-ovalle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Each of the government’s affidavits contained the full and complete statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 2518(l)(c). Each affidavit properly incorporated previous affidavits, see United States v. Garcia-Villalba, 585 F.3d 1223, 1232 (9th Cir.2009), and provided case-specific explanations for the use, limitations and rejection of various traditional surveillance tactics in the investigation of specific individuals, see id. at 1229-30. The district court didn’t abuse its discretion in finding that the wiretaps were necessary. See United States v. Rivera, 527 F.3d 891, 898 (9th Cir.2008). Nor has Macias-Ovalle made the substantial showing necessary to justify an evidentiary hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978). See id. at 155-56, 171, 98 S.Ct. 2674.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
432 F. App'x 710, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-macias-ovalle-ca9-2011.