Case ID: f-appx_432/html/0710-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oscar Francisco MACIAS-OVALLE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-30228.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted May 4, 2011.
    Filed May 12, 2011.
    Scott Kerin, Amy Potter, Jane Hawkins Shoemaker, Kelly A. Zusman, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Kendra M. Matthews, Ransom & Blackmon, LLP, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, BEA and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Each of the government’s affidavits contained the full and complete statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 2518(l)(c). Each affidavit properly incorporated previous affidavits, see United States v. Garcia-Villalba, 585 F.3d 1223, 1232 (9th Cir.2009), and provided case-specific explanations for the use, limitations and rejection of various traditional surveillance tactics in the investigation of specific individuals, see id. at 1229-30. The district court didn’t abuse its discretion in finding that the wiretaps were necessary. See United States v. Rivera, 527 F.3d 891, 898 (9th Cir.2008). Nor has Macias-Ovalle made the substantial showing necessary to justify an evidentiary hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978). See id. at 155-56, 171, 98 S.Ct. 2674.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.