factual findings unless clearly erroneous.” United States v. Danhauer, 229 F.3d 1002, 1005 (10th Cir.2000). We review the district court’s conclusions of law de novo, including its determinations relating to sufficiency of a warrant and whether the Leon good-faith exception should apply. Id. Not all cases require us to resolve the Fourth Amendment question of whether a particular warrant was supported by probable cause. In some cases, resolution of the Fourth Amendment question is “necessary to guide future action by law enforcement officers and magistrates.” Id. (quotation omitted). In more routine cases, however, those that pose no important Fourth Amendment questions, we have discretion to proceed directly to the Leon good-faith analysis. See Leon, 468 U.S. at 925, 104 S.Ct. 3405 (<HOLDING>). We conclude this case falls in the latter
holding that reviewing courts have discretion to turn directly to the goodfaith issue holding that such a decision was within the trial courts discretion holding that  only a gross abuse of discretion will justify the reviewing court in disturbing the trial courts conclusions  recognizing that appellate courts that have applied rule 16 have afforded wide discretion to district courts applications of that rule holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion