Opinion ID: 6499796
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Wills’s Remaining Arguments

Text: Wills raises numerous other issues on appeal, which are listed in the margin. 36 We have carefully considered the parties’ briefs, the record, and the applicable law. We find for essentially the reasons expressed by the 33 676 F.3d at 451–52; see also United States v. Chaparro-Luna, 790 F. App’x 560, 566 (5th Cir. 2019) (unpublished) (same). 34 United States v. Garza, 448 F.3d 294, 299–300 (5th Cir. 2006); see also Taylor, 484 U.S. at 414–15 (providing a non-exhaustive list of factors to guide a district court’s “exercise of discretion” whether to exclude evidence for a discovery violation). 35 See Cinel v. Connick, 15 F.3d 1338, 1345 (5th Cir. 1994) (“An appellant abandons all issues not raised and argued in its initial brief on appeal. . . . A party who inadequately briefs an issue is considered to have abandoned the claim.” (emphasis in original; citations omitted)). 36 Wills’s remaining arguments concern: (1) alleged juror misconduct or bias, (2) an incomplete trial transcript, (3) destruction of raw data extracted from Losoya’s cell phone, (4) admission of expert testimony regarding cell site location information, (5) the search warrants used to obtain Wills’s emails and phone records, (6) the Government’s alleged intrusion into the attorney-client relationship stemming from the collection and dissemination of Wills’s handwritten notes, (7) the sufficiency of the jury instructions and indictment, (8) sufficiency of the evidence regarding the conviction for conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice, (9) alleged prosecutorial misconduct, and (10) exclusion of a laptop computer. 13 Case: 20-40648 Document: 00516392374 Page: 14 Date Filed: 07/13/2022 No. 20-40648 district court and the Government that none of Wills’s remaining arguments have merit. We forego discussion of these issues.