United States v. John Doe, a Juvenile
Opinion
Opinion
John Doe, a fourteen year old member of the Salt River Pima-Marieopa Indian Com-mumty, appeals his conviction on two counts of juvenile delinquency. He contends that use of his inculpatory statements violated the Fifth Amendment and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. We have jurisdiction, 12 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
Doe was convicted after a one day bench trial of two acts of juvenile delinquency, see 18 U.S.C. §§ 5031-5037 , for (1) assault with a dangerous weapon with intent to do bodily harm, 18 U.S.C. § 113 (c), and (2) use of a short-barreled shotgun during and in relation to a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). Both charges arose out of the drive-by shooting of another juvenile Indian on the Salt River Indian Reservation. See 18 U.S.C. § 1153 .
II. DISCUSSION
A. Waiver of Miranda Rights
Doe argues that the government failed to prove that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights. We review de novo whether Doe voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and for clear error whether that waiver was knowing and intelligent. United States v. Bautista-Avila, 6 F.3d 1360, 1364 (9th Cir.1993).