Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford Michael OLIVER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-02-03
Citations: 364 F. App'x 342
Docket Number: No. 08-50256
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford Michael OLIVER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, WARDLAW, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 364
Pages: 342–343

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford Michael OLIVER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-50256.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 1, 2010.
Filed Feb. 3, 2010.
Gregory William Staples, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Santa Ana, CA, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
Jilbert Tahmazian, Law Offices of Jil-bert Tahmazian, Glendale, CA, for Defen-danb-Appellant.
Before: KLEINFELD, WARDLAW, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Oliver pleaded guilty to possessing more than 30 kilograms of phencyclidine (PCP) with intent to distribute. On appeal, he challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence taken from his storage locker located inside the shared parking garage of his apartment complex. Oliver's argument, that the police broke into the garage, lied to the magistrate judge about how they got into the garage, and obtained a warrant to search Oliver's storage locker and apartment, fails for two alternative independent reasons. First, Oliver has no standing to challenge police entry into the shared parking garage, even if the police were trespassing. United States v. Nohara, 3 F.3d 1239, 1242 (9th Cir.1993). Second, the district court held an eviden-tiary hearing, found the police detectives credible, and made further findings of fact that the police did not break into the garage and made no misrepresentations in the affidavits submitted in support of the applications for a search warrant. These findings are not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Martinez-Garcia, 397 F.3d 1205, 1215 n. 5 (9th Cir.2005).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.