Opinion ID: 723469
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Computer Access Omission

Text: 10 The affidavit recounts that on certain dates Kyle accessed the accounts of McFadden, Billy Senior, and Billy Junior. In her declaration to the district court, Kyle claimed she was authorized to access tax information on taxpayers, and that she had been specifically assigned to McFadden's case. Kyle contends Mason recklessly omitted from his affidavit the fact that she was authorized to access McFadden's computer file. We disagree. 11 Kyle made no showing that Mason was aware Kyle had authority to access McFadden's file. The affidavit did not state that Kyle lacked authority to access the files. Nor is there any implication that Mason attempted to manipulate the inferences a magistrate will draw by reporting less than the entire story. See United States v. Stanert, 762 F.2d 779, 781 (9th Cir.1985), amended, 769 F.2d 1410 (9th Cir.1985). Rather, the affidavit forthrightly recounted only what was known to Mason. Consequently, Kyle failed to make the substantial preliminary showing that the alleged omission was intentional or reckless.