United States v. Juvenile A

MEMORANDUM

Defendant/Appellant L.G.H. appeals his adjudication as a juvenile delinquent and sentence for aggravated sexual assault. We affirm.

1. The violations of the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (“FJDA”), 18 U.S.C. § 5033 , in this case do not give rise to a due process violation, so dismissal was not required. L.G.H.’s parents were not immediately notified of his custody and Miranda rights, but the Government’s failure to advise applied only to L.G.H.’s interrogation, not a hearing on his freedom. See United States v. RRA-A, 229 F.3d 737, 746 (9th Cir.2000); United States v. Doe (Doe V), 219 F.3d 1009, 1016 (9th Cir.2000). Although L.G.H. was not immediately informed of his Miranda rights after arrest, he was so informed before interrogation. Id.

2. Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion by ordering suppression instead of dismissal of the information as a remedy for the statutory violations. Once the district court suppressed the confession and physical evidence at trial, the FJDA violations were harmless “beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Doe (Doe II), 862 F.2d 776, 779 (9th Cir.1988). The unlawfully obtained evidence almost certainly did…