Alexander

MEMORANDUM *

1. Kenneth S. Alexander’s argument that the district court failed to rule on his motion to suppress is foreclosed by the fact that the district court in fact denied the motion to suppress.

2. The district court properly denied Alexander’s motions to subpoena the state court judge who issued the search warrant and a forensic document examiner. Alexander failed to demonstrate “the necessity of the ... presence [of these witnesses] for an adequate defense.” Fed. R.Crim.P. 17(b). The denial of Alexander’s request to subpoena the state court judge did not violate his right to compulsory process. See Selam v. Warm Springs Tribal Corr. Facility, 134 F.3d 948, 952 (9th Cir.1998) (observing “that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of compulsory process only is violated when the criminal defendant is arbitrarily deprived of testimony that would have been relevant and material, and vital to the defense.”) (citation, internal quotation marks and alterations omitted).

3. Alexander did not meet his burden of showing that material impeachment evidence was withheld from him. See *380 United States v. Si, 343 F.3d 1116, 1122 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that “[a] defendant has the burden…