United States v. Gregory Michael Celestine, AKA Michael Erickson, Gregory Celestine, Michael Celestine and Michael Ericson

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 3747·324 F.3d 1095·2003 WL 1786871·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2920·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 6426
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 4, 200300-50669California2,923 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Gregory M. Celestine (“Celestine”), who pled guilty conditionally to drug crimes, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a search, pursuant to a warrant, of a house of which he was a part owner. He contends that the search warrant was not served properly because the affidavit in support of probable cause did not accompany the other documents that comprised the warrant and was served on his attorney after the search was completed. He also contends that the district court incorrectly held that the warrant itself was validly supported by probable cause and that it was timely served on him. We affirm the district court.

I. Factual Background & Procedural History

This case arises out of a search that Drug Enforcement Agency agents con ducted at a house in Canyon Lake, California, while Celestine was present and that revealed a largescale indoor marijuana growing operation. The house belongs to Ericson Production, Inc., a fictional company of which Celestine is a co-owner and, under the alias of “Michael Ericson,” president. The search was conducted pursuant to a warrant issued by a federal magistrate judge based on an affidavit from DEA…

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.