United States v. Alejandro Perez

Good Law
538 F. App'x 818
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 20, 201312-50395California622 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Alejandro Perez appeals his conviction of importing methamphetamine into the United States. He challenges the district court’s failure to suppress statements made during an interrogation that exceeded the six-hour “safe harbor” period. He also challenges the district court’s finding that his custodial statements were voluntary, and argues that the district court committed reversible error when it instructed the jury that the element of knowledge could only be proven by circumstantial evidence. We affirm.

We do not reach the merits of defendant’s Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5 claim because it was waived. We review de novo issues involving waiver. United States v. Jackson, 697 F.3d 1141, 1143 (9th Cir.2012). Perez’s motion to suppress was made solely on grounds of voluntariness, not on delayed presentment. Perez sought dismissal based on the multi-day delay in presentment but did not identify to the district court any statements he contended should be suppressed, let alone focus attention on whether there was any inappropriate delay in presentment on the day of arrest. Given that the defendant bears the burden of proving grounds for exclusion, it was incumbent on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.