Cebreros-Barraza

United States v. Cebreros-Barraza

Good Law
4 F. App'x 492
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 22, 2001No. 99-50600; D.C. CR-99-00967-WBECalifornia507 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Oscar A. Cebreros-Barraza was convicted of importing marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. He appeals, contending that incriminating statements he gave prior to receiving Miranda warnings were involuntary, partly because the agent failed to inform him of his rights under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Cebreros-Barraza pleaded guilty pursuant to a conditional plea agreement. As to his appellate rights, the plea agreement provided:

In his initial brief to this court, Cebreros-Barraza framed the sole issue on appeal as “Whether a non-citizen defendant’s post-arrest statements to government officers should be suppressed based on the officers’ failure to advise the defendant of his right to contact his consulate, in violation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.” After the briefs were filed, we issued an en banc opinion holding that “a foreign national’s post-arrest statements should not be excluded solely because he made them before being told of his right to consular notification.” United States v. Lombera-Camorlinga, 206 F.3d 882, 888 (9th Cir.2000). In…

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.