United States v. Jose De Jesus Flores Martinez

972 F.2d 1100 61 USLW 2175 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jose De Jesus Flores MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-30096. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 9, 1992. Decided Aug. 17, 1992. As Amended Sept. 17, 1992. Nina Goodman, Asst. U.S. Atty., U.S., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellant. Bryan E. Lessley, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Eugene, Or., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Before: BROWNING, D.W. NELSON and CANBY, Circuit Judges. CANBY, Circuit Judge. 1 This is an interlocutory appeal by the United States of an order suppressing a statement that defendant Jose Flores Martinez made to federal investigators. The central issue is whether Martinez's request for counsel in his state proceedings prohibited a subsequent interrogation by federal officials outside the presence of counsel after the state charges were dismissed. We conclude that the resolution of this question depends on the degree of cooperation between federal and state authorities, which is not clear from the record before us. We therefore remand. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 2…

This is an interlocutory appeal by the United States of an order suppressing a statement that defendant Jose Flores Martinez made to federal investigators. The central issue is whether Martinez’s request for counsel in his state proceedings prohibited a subsequent interrogation by federal officials outside the presence of counsel after the state charges were dismissed. We conclude that the resolution of this question depends on the degree of cooperation between federal and state authorities, which is not clear from the record before us. We therefore remand.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Martinez was arrested in March 1990 and was subsequently charged in the Circuit Court for Wasco County, Oregon with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, theft of a firearm, and possession of a controlled substance. At his arraignment, he requested an attorney and completed a form entitled “Affidavit of Indigence and Order for Appointment of Counsel.” The *1102 state charges were dismissed, however, so no attorney was appointed. Martinez nonetheless remained in state custody, because his pre-existing parole had been revoked as a result of his arrest.

On September 4, 1990, two days before Martinez’s…

dissenting:

Jose Flores Martinez was arrested by state authorities on March 11, 1990, and was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. Although Martinez does not speak English, he managed to request counsel at his arraignment in state court. Martinez was never provided with counsel, however. Instead, he remained in jail on the state charge. Even though that charge was dropped in April 1990, Martinez remained in state custody until September 6 because his possession of a firearm violated a condition of his parole. On September 6, the day Martinez was scheduled to be released from jail on the parole violation, he was instead handed over directly to federal officers, who charged him with the same crime — being a felon in possession of a firearm — on the basis of the same arrest. Martinez was interrogated by those officers while in federal custody, and he confessed.

The district court suppressed the confession, holding that “once he’s requested a lawyer, the fact that he did not get one after he requested it and spent that long a time in jail before he was then turned over to the federal authorities precludes the use of a confession.” The majority reverses the district…