Roddy

MEMORANDUM **

After entering a conditional guilty plea, John Cormac Roddy appeals his judgment of conviction for being an unlawful user of controlled substances in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(3) and 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a). Pursuant to his conditional guilty plea, Roddy raises an issue whether the district court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence, with request for an evidentiary hearing, under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), thus challenging the sufficiency of the warrant that authorized the police to search his residence. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

To get a Franks hearing, Roddy had to make a substantial preliminary showing (1) that the affidavit contained intentionally or *128 recklessly false statements, United States v. Lefkowitz, 618 F.2d 1313, 1317 (9th Cir. 1980), or omissions, United States v. Stanert, 762 F.2d 775, 781 (9th Cir.1985), and (2) that without the alleged defects the affidavit would not establish probable cause. Lefkowitz, 618 F.2d at 1317 . Roddy did…