Mauleon
United States v. Mauleon
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Crisanto Garcia Mauleon (“Garcia”) appeals his 120-month sentence following a guilty verdict on the charge of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). He also appeals the denial of his pre-trial motion to suppress statements made to law enforcement officers. We have jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a). We affirm the district court’s denial of Garcia’s motion to suppress, reverse the 120-month sentence and remand for re-sentencing.
Garcia challenges the admission of two statements: (1) a post-arrest statement made to Detective Caloca and (2) a eonfes *784 sion given to Special Agents Briggs and Pothier during a later interrogation.
The district court ruled that Garcia’s statements to Caloca were “voluntary, that they were not as a result of interrogation, [and] that there was no requirement that [Garcia] be advised of his Miranda rights.” We agree. Caloca questioned Garcia about his role as a witness to an unrelated homicide; he did not question Garcia about his pending drug charges, and specifically informed Garcia that he did not want to discuss the drug charges. The trial court correctly…