Huling

United States v. Huling

Good Law
266 F. App'x 607
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 11, 2008No. 07-30063California396 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Keith Martin Huling appeals various pretrial rulings. We affirm.

I

Whether or not the warrant was sufficient, it is not “so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.” United States v. Clark, 31 F.3d 831, 835 (9th Cir.1994) (quoting United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 923 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 , 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984)). Information provided by a confidential informant (Cl) familiar with Highland Motor Sports was corroborated by Detective Jenista, who confirmed that a truck matching a truck bed seen on the premises had been stolen and that someone with the same first name as one of the people identified as working at *609 Highland was in fact associated with it. A polygraph examination indicated that the Cl was truthful. There is no indication that the magistrate was misled by information in the affidavit or by anything that Jenista failed to state. And Jenista ran the warrant by a district attorney. In these circumstances, as the district court held, the good faith exception applies. See Leon, 468 U.S. at 922-23 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 ; Clark, 31 F.3d at 835-36 .

II

Huling argues that the court should have…

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.