United States v. Lucio Camarillo

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Lucio Joaquin Camarillo timely appeals the district court’s denial of his motions to suppress and his motion for a hearing pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978). Defendant argues that the search warrant was premised on an illegal wiretap and that the affidavit supporting the search warrant omitted material information. We review a district court’s denial of a motion to suppress de novo. United States v. Maddox, 614 F.3d 1046, 1048 (9th Cir.2010). We review an issuing judge’s decision that a wiretap was necessary for abuse of discretion. United States v. Canales Gomez, 358 F.3d 1221, 1225 (9th Cir.2004). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

The wiretap warrant contained sufficient information for the issuing judge to determine that the wiretap was necessary. See United States v. McGuire, 307 F.3d 1192, 1196 (9th Cir.2002) (“This ‘necessity’ requirement can be satisfied by a showing in the application that ordinary investigative procedures, employed in good faith, would likely be ineffective in the particular case.” (citing United States v. Brone, 792 F.2d 1504, 1506 (9th Cir.1986))). The…