United States v. Jeronimo Botello-Rosales

Jeronimo Botello-Rosales appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress his post-arrest statements to law enforcement officers. After the district court denied the motion to suppress, Botel-lo entered a conditional guilty plea to conspiracy to manufacture marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(l)(A)(vii), and 846, and possession of a firearm by a person unlawfully in the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(5) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse.

The district court erred in denying Botello’s suppression motion because the Spanish-language warning administered to Botello before he was interrogated failed to “reasonably convey” to Botello “his rights as required by Miranda [v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966)].” Florida v. Powell, 559 U.S. 50 , 130 S.Ct. 1195, 1204 , 175 L.Ed.2d 1009 (2010) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Duckworth v. Eagan, 492 U.S. 195, 203 , 109 S.Ct. 2875 , 106 L.Ed.2d 166 (1989); California v. Prysock, 453 U.S. 355, 361 , 101 S.Ct. 2806 , 69 L.Ed.2d 696 (1981) (per curiam)). The district court correctly found that Detective…