Summary
upholding the search of a motor home in the bay of a garage under a warrant for a business address when the police were told it was used for storage and had not been moved for some time
Summary of this case from Rodgers v. StateOpinion
Editorial Note:
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Resubmitted March 23, 1993.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. CR-87-0368-R-1, Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding.
C.D.Cal., 944 F.2d 910.
AFFIRMED.
Before KILKENNY, SNEED and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
In our memorandum disposition filed September 19, 1991 we rejected the arguments raised by Naghdi on appeal but remanded the matter to the district court for a determination whether the court improperly relied on the government's supplemental sentencing memorandum. The district court's Findings of Fact Pursuant to Limited Remand, filed November 26, 1991 and docketed with this Court on March 17, 1993, reveals that the district court did not rely on the supplemental sentencing memorandum and therefore committed no reversible error at sentencing. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence appealed from are
AFFIRMED.