Rodriguez

United States v. Rodriguez

Good Law
135 F. App'x 89
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 16, 2005Nos. 03-50335, 03-50369California473 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants Nicolas Rodriguez and Kedrin Kizzee challenge (1) their convictions for conspiracy to possess and distribute controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846, and (2) their sentences. We affirm their convictions but remand their sentences pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

The appellants challenge their convictions by claiming that the evidence obtained through two wiretaps should have been suppressed. The appellants allege, as they did below, that the first wiretap affidavit failed to establish “necessity.” Kizzee alone claims, as he did below, that the second wiretap affidavit contained false statements and failed to establish neeessi *90 ty. None of these arguments are persuasive.

First, the affidavit supporting the initial wiretap makes clear that investigative procedures other than a wiretap had been tried but failed to develop important evidence and identify key suspects; namely, the police could not identify the conspiracy’s drug suppliers and associates. That some of the “other investigative tools” had some success is immaterial because success in developing some evidence does not indicate…

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.