United States v. Jason Brandt Wells

19 F.3d 1442 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jason Brandt WELLS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-30054. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 8, 1994. Decided March 23, 1994. Before: BROWNING, KOZINSKI and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 A. The district court found that the photospread was not suggestive. Tr. of Oct. 26, 1992, at 35-36, 39. Because courts only evaluate a photospread's reliability after finding it suggestive, see United States v. Love, 746 F.2d 477, 478 (9th Cir.1984), the district court properly declined to consider reliability. 3 We also reject Wells' argument that the district court should have excluded the evidence under its supervisory power. Wells never asked the court to use this power and the lineup procedure was not "inherently unreliable." 4 B. The district court did not err in admitting testimony about the burglary. This evidence did not…