Ahmad

MEMORANDUM *

Issam Ahmad Suliman Abu Laila (“Suliman”) appeals his conviction and sentence for fraud relating to identification documents, access devices, and an application for a passport. He contends that the search warrants for his apartment, storage unit, and two computers were not supported by probable cause, and that the officer’s reliance on the warrants did not fall within the “good-faith” exception to the exclusionary rule. In addition, he argues that his sentence was improper in light of Blakely v. Washington, — U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). We affirm the conviction, but remand for the district court to determine whether re-sentencing is appropriate under United States v. Castro, 382 F.3d 927 , (9th Cir.2004).

1. Fourth Amendment Claims

We hold that the government has waived the claim that Suliman failed to establish standing to challenge the search. See Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 209 , 101 S.Ct. 1642 , 68 L.Ed.2d 38 (1981). However, we also conclude that the government acted in good-faith in executing the warrants.

*185 Under Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 , 103 S.Ct. 2317 , 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983), probable cause to issue a search…

dissenting.

I do not accept the majority’s rationale and therefore dissent from the court’s holding. The majority holds that even if probable cause did not exist to issue the *187 first search warrant, the evidence seized should be admitted under the good-faith exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule. The Fourth Amendment, however, does not permit the type of fishing expedition that occurred in this case. Here, the magistrate judge did not have a “substantial basis” for concluding that probable cause existed to issue the search warrant. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238-39 , 103 S.Ct. 2317 , 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). Moreover, the good-faith exception does not apply because the affidavit was “so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.” United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 923 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 , 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984).

I.

In reviewing the magistrate judge’s probable cause determination, we must decide whether the magistrate judge had a “substantial basis” for concluding that probable cause existed. Gates, 462 U.S. at 238-39 , 103 S.Ct. 2317 . A magistrate judge’s probable cause determination must be a…