United States v. Spiros Romensas

MEMORANDUM

Spiros Romensas appeals his conviction and sentence for aiding and abetting bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 , 2113(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo the voluntariness of a Miranda waiver; the underlying factual findings are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Jennings, 515 F.3d 980, 986 (9th Cir.2008). A trial court’s finding that a Miranda waiver was knowing and intelligent is reviewed for clear error. United States v. Shi, 525 F.3d 709, 728 (9th Cir.2008). Here, police officers read to Romensas each of his Miranda rights. Romensas told officers that he understood each right. He then spoke to officers at length in English. The court “in all cases must examine the totality of the circumstances,” and here the district court did not err in concluding that Romensas’s waiver of his rights was voluntary. United States v. Amano, 229 F.3d 801, 805 (9th Cir.2000). Further, Romensas waived each of his rights “with a full awareness of both the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it,” and his waiver was knowing and intelligent. Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412, 421 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 , 89…