Opinion ID: 551809
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Right to a Franks Hearing

Text: 9 Whether Watson was entitled to a Franks hearing is reviewed de novo. United States v. Johns, 851 F.2d 1131, 1133 (9th Cir.1988). 10 A defendant may have a right to challenge the truthfulness of the search-warrant affidavit in a special Franks hearing. United States v. Franks, 438 U.S. 154 (1977). Watson's private investigator's affidavit alleged that Watson stayed in a Reno hotel for two of the four-day range during which CRI# 2 allegedly saw Watson in possession of cocaine. The affidavit did not support that Rivera's statements were false, and thus did not entitle Watson to a Franks hearing. Watson's challenge to the use of statements by his apartment manager to Rivera also was inadequate to require a Franks hearing. One of the requirements necessary to grant a Franks hearing is that the challenged statements must have been necessary to find probable cause. United States v. Dicesare, 765 F.2d 890, 894-895 (9th Cir.1985) (citing United States v. Kiser, 716 F.2d 1268, 1271 (9th Cir.1983). Here, the district court did not rely on the apartment manager's statements in finding probable cause. Thus, Watson's request for a Franks hearing was properly denied. 1 11