Court Opinion

ID: 9556504
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-17 16:00:38.705603+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:06:02.318795
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 22-3438
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                                Ryan William Souza

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                       ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                    for the Southern District of Iowa - Central
                                  ____________

                              Submitted: July 26, 2023
                               Filed: August 17, 2023
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Ryan Souza appeals after he entered a conditional guilty plea to drug and
firearm offenses. He argues that the district court1 erred by denying his motion to

      1
        The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa.
suppress and his request for a hearing pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154
(1978).

       We conclude that Souza waived his challenge to the denial of a Franks hearing,
as he failed to raise in the district court the specific challenges he now makes on
appeal. See United States v. Green, 691 F.3d 960, 965 (8th Cir. 2012) (mere filing
of motion to suppress is not sufficient to avoid waiver of specific arguments that are
advanced for first time on appeal). We also conclude that the district court did not
err in denying Souza’s motion to suppress, as the information in the affidavit for the
relevant warrant application supported a finding of probable cause. See United States
v. Evans, 4 F.4th 633, 636 (8th Cir. 2021) (on appeal of denial of motion to suppress,
district court’s findings of fact are reviewed for clear error and its legal conclusions
are reviewed de novo); United States v. El-Alamin, 574 F.3d 915, 923 (8th Cir. 2009)
(whether affidavit establishes probable cause is determined by issuing judge based
on totality of circumstances).

      Accordingly, we affirm.
                     ______________________________

                                          -2-