Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eric Thomas FRIEDLANDER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-23
Citations: 79 F. App'x 285
Docket Number: No. 03-10045; D.C. No. CR-02-00011-RLH
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Eric Thomas FRIEDLANDER, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before HAWKINS, THOMAS, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 79
Pages: 285–286

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Eric Thomas FRIEDLANDER, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 03-10045.
D.C. No. CR-02-00011-RLH.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 10, 2003.
Decided Oct. 23, 2003.
Before HAWKINS, THOMAS, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The claim of Defendant-Appellant Eric Thomas Friedlander ("Friedlander") that the district court was obligated to hold an evidentiary hearing on his motion to suppress fails because his moving papers were not sufficiently specific and detailed so as to "enable the court to conclude that contested issues of fact going to the validity of the search are in issue." United States v. Walczak, 783 F.2d 852, 857 (9th Cir.1986); see also United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 620 (9th Cir.2000). The determination of the district court that Friedlander's mo tion to suppress was based on suspicion and conjecture is supported by the record,
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.