Shetty

MEMORANDUM **

Following his conditional guilty plea to one count of bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 , and one count of money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (a)(1)(A)®, the appellant challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence from certain business documents obtained by private parties and turned over to law enforcement agents. 1 He specifically contends that the private parties stole the documents and their actions constituted a governmental search in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

We review de novo the district court’s denial of the appellant’s suppression motion. United States v. Crawford, 372 F.3d 1048, 1053 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc). The district court’s factual findings underlying the denial of the motion are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Bynum, 362 F.3d 574, 578 (9th Cir.2004). The appellant has the burden of establishing government involvement in a private search. United States v. Snowadzki, 723 F.2d 1427, 1429 (9th Cir.1984).

Here, even if we were to assume that the documents were stolen, the appellant has failed to show that the government acquiesced in the alleged theft. There is no evidence in…