Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Guillermo LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-28
Citations: 193 F. App'x 708
Docket Number: No. 05-10638
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Guillermo LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and BERTELSMAN, Senior District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 193
Pages: 708–708

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Guillermo LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-10638.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 26, 2006.
Decided July 28, 2006.
Kathleen A. Servatius, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mark A. McBride, Esq., Woodland Hills, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and BERTELSMAN, Senior District Judge.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable William O. Bertelsman, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Because there were several independent bases supporting probable cause for the search warrant, the district court did not err in admitting the seized evidence or in denying a Franks hearing. See United States v. Meling, 47 F.3d 1546, 1554 (9th Cir.1995) ("If, when material that is the subject of the alleged falsity or reckless disregard is set to one side, there remains sufficient content in the warrant affidavit to support a finding of probable cause, no hearing is required.") (citation and alteration omitted).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the narcotics samples, as the government sufficiently established the chain of custody and Appellant failed to produce any evidence of tampering. See United States v. Anguloa, 598 F.2d 1182, 1186-87 (9th Cir.1979); see also United States v. Kaiser, 660 F.2d 724, 733 (9th Cir.1981).
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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.