Opinion ID: 204158
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: New York Wiretap

Text: Cartagena also challenges the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained from the New York wiretap. Cartagena argues, as with his Title III contentions, that the district court should have suppressed the fruits of the New York wiretap because the affidavit in support of the application omitted material information and contained misleading statements. However, upon reviewing the record, we agree with the district court that the government did not offer evidence obtained from the New York wiretap against Cartagena. Further, we conclude that any evidence obtained from the New York wiretap that may have been used in the Title III wiretap affidavit was not material. Cartagena has not 4 Although we agree with the district court's decision to suppress the Title III wiretap, we briefly address its discussion of the necessity standard in order to provide clarification. In applying Title's III's necessity requirement, the district court imposed two requirements that we have never demanded to establish necessity. First, the district court considered whether the informant in this case was [] in a position to provide all the information that objectively reasonable investigators would want or need for a successful prosecution of the several people involved in the distribution network. López, 2007 WL 4556904, at . Nowhere does § 2518(1)(c) or this Court's jurisprudence require that we assess the wants or needs of the objectively reasonable investigator. Second, the district court considered the evidentiary reliability of informant-provided information. Id. at . Again, the evidentiary reliability of an informant's testimony is not part of the necessity requirement under § 2518(1)(c). In evaluating necessity, a court need only consider whether other investigatory procedures have been tried and failed or if they would be unlikely to succeed if pursued. -13- demonstrated otherwise. Thus, we affirm the district court's denial of Cartagena's motion to suppress the fruits of the New York wiretap as moot.