United States v. Floyd Mendiola

MEMORANDUM

1. The district court properly denied Floyd Mendiola’s motion to suppress the statements he made during the April 2014 meeting with the FBI. Mendiola was not in custody during the interview, so there was no need to advise him of his Miranda rights.

This court uses five factors to determine whether someone is in custody: “(1) the language used to summon the individual; (2) the extent to which the defendant is confronted with evidence of guilt; (3) the physical surroundings of the interrogation; (4) the duration of the detention; and (5) the degree of pressure applied to detain the individual.” United States v. Kim, 292 F.3d 969, 974 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting United States v. Hayden, 260 F.3d 1062, 1066 (9th Cir. 2001)). While the second and fourth factors arguably favor Mendiola, we conclude that the other three factors weigh against a finding of custody.

When a suspect voluntarily agrees to meet with police with an understanding that questioning will ensue, the first Kim factor weighs against a finding of custody. See United States v. IMM, 747 F.3d 754, 766 (9th Cir. 2014). That is the situation here. FBI Agent McDoulett testified that he “asked Mr. Mendiola if he…