Winfrey

MEMORANDUM *

Roland N. Winfrey challenges his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1) and his sentence, imposed under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a)(2). We affirm Winfrey’s conviction but remand for resentencing in light of Watson v. United States, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 579 , 169 L.Ed.2d 472 (2007).

The Washington judge’s determination that probable cause supported a warrant to search Winfrey’s residence was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Hill, 459 F.3d 966, 970 (9th Cir.2006), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 1863 , 167 L.Ed.2d 353 (2007); United States v. Hay, 231 F.3d 630 , 634 n. 4 (9th Cir.2000). The supporting affidavit filed by Spokane, Washington police officers cited specific information provided by a confidential informant that was corroborated by the independent investigative efforts of the investigating officers, thereby providing ample basis for a judge to conclude that there was probable cause that evidence of drug distribution and illegal firearm possession would be recovered from the residence to be searched. See Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 230-31 , 103 S.Ct. 2317 , 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983).

The district court properly admitted testimonial evidence regarding…