United States v. Paul Bennett Bigman

Appellant was convicted of failing to register with the Selective Service System in violation of 50 U.S.C. App. § 462. We affirm.

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in admitting certain statements made by him to FBI agents prior and subsequent to his arrest because the agents did not advise him of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), before questioning him. The government responds that appellant was not “in custody” when interviewed prior to his arrest, and had already been adequately warned before the post-arrest questioning. We need not reach these issues. Assuming, arguendo, that appellant should have been advised of his Miranda rights on both occasions, he raised no objection on this ground before or during trial and, in fact, expressly declined the trial court’s offer to hold a Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 , 84 S.Ct. 1774 , 12 L.Ed.2d 908 , hearing on the admissibility of the statements. Moreover, the substance of the statements was repeated in appellant’s own trial testimony. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that admission of the statements was plain error affecting appellant’s substantial rights.…