Crawford

MEMORANDUM *

We affirm Defendant-Appellant Antonio Crawford’s jury conviction for knowingly and unlawfully distributing heroin and crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1).

The district court properly denied Crawford’s motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to the search warrant. The supporting affidavit indicated that Crawford owned the home to be searched and paid its utilities, and that the government’s confidential informant told police that Crawford lived in the area where the home was located (the “Indian Trails” area). Following the two government-sponsored controlled buys of illicit drugs, law enforcement had probable cause to believe that contraband and other crime evidence would be found at Crawford’s home. See United States v. Valenzuela, 596 F.2d 824, 829 (9th Cir.1979). Our law does not require more specific evidence confirming that Crawford resided in the home. The magistrate judge did not commit clear error in issuing the warrant. The district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress.

Evidence of Crawford’s prior drug dealing was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), and the government satisfied our four-pronged test for…