Covarrubias

United States v. Covarrubias

Caution
179 F.3d 1219·99 Daily Journal DAR 5965·1999 WL 382838·1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 12101·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4655
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 14, 1999No. 98-30167California3,454 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

This appeal arises out of the questioning of defendants by state and federal officers before and after the appointment of counsel. The arrest of defendants Ascencio Daniel Covarrubias and Juan Luis Ochoa was planned and executed by officers of the Sunnyside Police Department with the assistance of a federal immigration agent. The local police and the federal agent both conducted interrogations of the defendants about possible state and federal crimes. The charges against the defendants, initially filed in state court, were dismissed, and the defendants were subsequently charged in federal court for a different offense, arising out of the same course of conduct.

When federal and state authorities cooperate in arresting a suspect and deciding which jurisdiction will prosecute him, an increasingly common occurrence in an era in which many offenses are made punishable under both state and federal law, they must take care to insure that the suspect’s constitutional rights are not violated in the process. Here, such care was not taken, and the result was the breach of the defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel. We affirm the district court’s decision that the Sixth Amendment…

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.