United States v. Louis John Ippolito, Michael Contino, Irving Schwartz, William Darnold, Lawrence Miller, Thomas Arrants, and Arthur Joseph Natoli

Good Law
774 F.2d 1482·1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 24453
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 29, 198584-5257California2,716 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

The United States appeals from the district court’s suppression of information gained through wiretaps. The district court relied on Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), to hold that false and misleading information in government affidavits concerning the necessity of the wiretaps required suppression of the information derived from the wiretaps. We affirm.

FACTS

On November 3, 1982, the district court issued an order allowing the government to intercept certain wire communications. The government’s application for the order was supported by an affidavit of Ralph E. Lumpkin, Special Agent, FBI, that included the following statements that the court, in subsequent hearings, found false or misleading:

At the suppression hearing it was developed that Hanophy, informant number 2, was working with agent Schettino, a former FBI agent in a Miami drug investigation involving Ippolito. Although Hanophy told FBI Agent Lumpkin and another agent, Sadler, that he would not testify in the California case because he feared Ippol-ito, it became apparent that this assertion was not entirely true. Rather, it developed that Agent Schettino had told Hanophy to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.