Opinion ID: 2981544
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Unredacted Affidavit from Rice

Text: Last, Sims contends the district court erred by refusing to enter an order compelling the government to provide an unredacted affidavit that was submitted in United States v. Rice, No. 3:04-CR-83-R. Sims argues that this information was necessary for him to make the showing required to suppress the wiretap and/or have a Franks hearing. This request has no basis in any discovery rule. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(a)(1)(E)(i) makes documents discoverable that would be material to preparing a defense. Sims has made no such showing that this affidavit would be material. The Rice affidavit was not incorporated by reference in the affidavits in Sims’s case, nor were any of the intercepted communications obtained from the Rice case included. Sims merely states that he should be able to see it because he was a target in that investigation. As the district court found, Sims merely “proposed a series of generalities based upon an unsubstantiated possibility.” The district court conducted an in camera review of the unredacted affidavit and found nothing in it that was material to Sims’s arguments. Given these facts, it cannot be said that the district court abused its discretion.