United States v. Robert Agli

MEMORANDUM

1. Agli argues that the district court should have granted his motion to suppress drug paraphernalia police discovered during a search of Lee Armfield’s apartment. This argument fails for two reasons.

First, Agli did not challenge the district court’s finding that he lacked Fourth Amendment standing in his opening brief. Therefore, he has waived that issue. Koerner v. Grigas, 328 F.3d 1039, 1048 (9th Cir.2003) (“[W]e will not ordinarily consider matters on appeal that are not specifically and distinctly argued in appellant’s opening brief.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Without standing, Agli may not challenge the search of Armfield’s apartment.

Second, Agli has not shown that the district court clearly erred when it found that Armfield validly consented to the search of his own apartment. See United States v. Washington, 490 F.3d 765, 769 (9th Cir.2007); United States v. Murphy, 516 F.3d 1117, 1122 (9th Cir.2008) (“It is well established that a person with common authority over property can consent to a search of that property without the permission of the other persons with whom he shares that authority.”). The district court’s conclusion that Armfield…