What is the test for a motion to suppress evidence obtained through wiretap warrants?

Zografidis and Catino first assert that the district court erred by denying their motions to suppress evidence gained through wiretap warrants because those warrants failed to articulate a full and complete statement of necessity. "In reviewing a ruling on a motion to suppress wiretap evidence, we accord deference to the district court." United States v. Diaz, 176 F.3d 52, 109 (2d Cir. 1999). "Our role in reviewing the issuance of a wiretap order is not to make a de novo determination of the sufficiency of the application, but to decide if the facts in the application were minimally adequate to support the determination that was made." Id. (quotation marks omitted).