MEMORANDUM
As appellant acknowledged in his briefs, and at oral argument, the application of the good-faith exception to this case is controlled by United, States v. Pineda-Moreno, 688 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir.2012), which held that officers who placed and monitored a GPS device on a suspect’s car reasonably relied on then-binding precedent. As a three judge panel, we are bound by Pineda-Moreno. See generally Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc). Thus, although the government conceded below that the placement and use of a GPS device on Leon’s vehicle was unconstitutional under United States v. Jones, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 945, 181 L.Ed.2d 911 (2012), the district court did not err in ruling that the fruits of these searches were nevertheless admissible under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. Pineda-Moreno, 688 F.3d at 1090-91.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.