United States v. Arthur Napier

Good Law
436 F.3d 1133·2006 WL 278899·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 2899
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 7, 200604-10249California2,227 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trott, J.

Appellant, Arthur Napier, contends that the district court erred by refusing to unseal a sealed attachment to the search warrant affidavit that ultimately paved the way to his arrest and conviction. The attachment detailed activity by a confidential informant. Napier argues that by sealing the attachment and by keeping it sealed, the government prevented him from making the substantial preliminary showing required by Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155-56 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), for an evidentiary hearing to test the validity of a search warrant affidavit. Napier asserts that this situation violated his due process rights. We disagree. Napier’s interest in testing the validity of the warrant through a Franks hearing is not absolute and must be balanced with other competing interests. The district court properly balanced Napier’s rights with the government’s competing interests in determining that the sealed portions of the search warrant affidavit should remain sealed. Furthermore, the district court correctly concluded that, at the end of the day, Napier failed to make the requisite substantial preliminary showing to be entitled to a Franks hearing.

We have…

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.