Bochicchio

United States v. Bochicchio

Good Law
23 F. App'x 751
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 2001No. 99-10610, 00-10280, 00-10355, 00-10371; D.C. No. CR 96-05127-OWWCalifornia2,393 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mark Crawford, John Crawford, Frank Bochicchio, and Kirk Johnson appeal their convictions for racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962 and 2, racketeering conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (d), and various other racketeering related crimes. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we AFFIRM. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we discuss them here only where necessary to explain our decision.

A. Mark Crawford

Mark Crawford contends that Texas Ranger Oscar Rivera “interrogated” him without advising him of his rights as required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). Under Miranda and its progeny, the term “interrogation” refers to either express questioning or its functional equivalent. See Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291, 300-01 , 100 S.Ct. 1682 , 64 L.Ed.2d 297 (1980). Here, Rivera’s questions and statements did not amount to interrogation because, in light of all the circumstances, Rivera had no reason to know that his conversation with Crawford was reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from Crawford. See United States v. Booth, 669 F.2d 1231, 1238…

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.