United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Pierre Fouche, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant

Caution
776 F.2d 1398·80 A.L.R. Fed. 605·1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 24062
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 19, 198584-5262, 84-5283California4,172 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tang, J.

Pierre Fouche appeals his conviction on two counts of unarmed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). He argues that the district court erred in finding that: (1) founded suspicion existed to stop his car; (2) probable cause existed for his arrest; and (3) he failed to reclaim his right to counsel before his first confession. The government cross-appeals, arguing that the district court erred in finding Fouche’s second confession involuntary as a product of unreasonable pre-arraignment delay.

We affirm the district court’s findings that the police had founded suspicion to stop Fouche’s car and probable cause to arrest him for bank robbery. We also affirm the district court’s suppression of Fouche’s second confession. On the question of Fouche’s attempt to reclaim the right to counsel before his first confession, however, we vacate and remand for additional findings.

I

FACTS

At approximately 2:26 p.m. on May 3, 1984, Montebello police officer Ramos responded to a call that the East West Federal Bank had just been robbed. The robbery suspect was described by radio communication as a black male, approximately 24 years old, 6 feet tall, with a small afro hairstyle,…

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.