United States v. Felipe Carlos Dominguez

963 F.2d 380 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Felipe Carlos DOMINGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-30303. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 6, 1992. * Decided May 21, 1992. Before PREGERSON, TROTT and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Felipe Carlos Dominguez was convicted with Efrain Oseguera-Haros on various drug charges. On appeal Dominguez claims that the statements of a third codefendant, Margarito Valdez-Alfaro, which were unavailable at trial and became available after the government granted Valdez-Alfaro immunity, constitute newly discovered evidence and warrant a new trial. Dominguez also claims that his own post-arrest statements should have been suppressed because of failure by the government to give adequate Miranda warnings until one-half hour into his interrogation. Finally, Dominguez argues that physical evidence obtained by consent stemming from the faulty…