Salazar

United States v. Salazar

Good Law
40 F. App'x 476
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 5, 2002Nos. 01-50175, 01-50187; D.C. Nos. CR-98-01081-SVW, CR-98-01081-SVW-1California746 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Moreno and Jose Salazar appeal their convictions for narcotics trafficking. They conditionally pled guilty to conspiring to possess cocaine and marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841(a)(1), and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We affirm.

I

The district court did not err by refusing to suppress evidence obtained through the wiretap on Moreno’s phone. The affidavit requesting a wiretap provided an extensive, persuasive explanation why alternative investigative tactics were unlikely to succeed. The affidavit explained that attempts to use physical surveillance at the San Carlos, Filmore, and Gridley locations had been thwarted by counter-surveillance techniques and had failed to produce information about the user of telephone #9 and pager # 4. Agents did not know the identity of the user of target telephone # 9 and pager # 4 prior to the wiretap, so they could not rely on confidential informants or undercover agents, and the affidavit provided detailed explanations regarding the shortcomings of every available informant. While the affidavit relied on evidence obtained…

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.