United States v. Michael Joseph Kavanagh

983 F.2d 1078 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Joseph KAVANAGH, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-30085. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 8, 1993. * Decided Jan. 14, 1993. Before D.W. NELSON, TROTT and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Michael Joseph Kavanagh appeals the denial of his motion requesting a Franks hearing, his motion to reveal informants, and his motion requesting an in camera hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988) and we affirm. 3 * Franks Hearing 4 Kavanagh contends the district court erred in not granting him a hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 171-72 (1978). The district court's refusal to conduct a Franks hearing is a mixed question of law and fact reviewed de novo. United States v. Homick, 964 F.2d 899, 904 (9th Cir.1992). In Franks, the Supreme Court held: 5 [W]here the defendant makes a substantial…