Baeza

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Rigoberto Baeza appeals from his conviction and sentence for methamphetamine and cocaine distribution and for being a felon in possession of ammunition. 1 We affirm.

Baeza argues that the district court erred in denying his motion for a hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), to test the veracity of the affidavit supporting the search warrant in this case. A Franks hearing is not necessary if the affidavit contains enough information to support a finding of probable cause even if the challenged information is ignored. See United States v. Meling, 47 F.3d 1546, 1556 (9th Cir.1995). In this case, even if the information received from Sam Roberts (the part of the affidavit Baeza challenges) was completely ignored, the affidavit contained sufficient information based on the law enforcement officers’ direct observations to support a finding of probable cause. The district court, therefore, did not err in denying the motion for a Franks hearing.

Baeza also argues that the district court committed plain error by failing to give Ninth Circuit Model Jury Instruction 4.10 (the “informant instruction”). Because Baeza did…