United States v. Friedlander

Full title: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff--Appellee, v. Eric Thomas FRIEDLANDER…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 23, 2003

79 F. App'x 285 (9th Cir. 2003)

Opinion

79 Fed.Appx. 285 (9th Cir. 2003) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff--Appellee, v. Eric Thomas FRIEDLANDER, Defendant--Appellant. No. 03-10045. D.C. No. CR-02-00011-RLH. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. October 23, 2003

Submitted Oct. 10, 2003. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Roger L. Hunt, District Judge, Presiding.

Before HAWKINS, THOMAS, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

The claim of Defendant-Appellant Eric Thomas Friedlander ("Friedlander") that the district court was obligated to hold an evidentiary hearing on his motion to suppress fails because his moving papers were not sufficiently specific and detailed so as to "enable the court to conclude that contested issues of fact going to the validity of the search are in issue." United States v. Walczak, 783 F.2d 852, 857 (9th Cir.1986); see also United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 620 (9th Cir.2000). The determination of the district court that Friedlander's motion

Page 286.

to suppress was based on suspicion and conjecture is supported by the record.

AFFIRMED.