United States v. Kuk Mo Yang

35 F.3d 573 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Kuk Mo YANG, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50025. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 23, 1994. * Decided Aug. 30, 1994. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Kuk Mo Yang appeals his conviction following a conditional guilty plea to possession of goods stolen from foreign commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 659 . Yang contends the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress post-arrest statements because (1) law-enforcement officers lacked probable cause to arrest him and (2) he did not voluntarily waive his Miranda rights. 1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review de novo both the district court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence, and its determination regarding the existence of probable cause for a warrantless arrest. United States v.…