Phan
United States v. Phan
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Hoang Thanh Phan appeals his jury trial conviction and sentence for three counts of bank fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1344 , 2 and 371, respectively. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.
Phan contends that the district court erred by failing to suppress two statements allegedly obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). The district court found that Phan was not in custody when either statement was made, therefore, his Miranda rights were not implicated. We review the district court’s determination de novo. United States v. Coutchavlis, 260 F.3d 1149, 1157 (9th Cir. 2001).
A person is in custody if under the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable person would believe that he or she was not free to leave. United States v. Melvin, 91 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.1996).
The May 29, 1999 Statement:
The first statement was made to FBI agents in Phan’s home, without advisement pf his Miranda rights. Phan contends that he was in custody because 1) he was the target of the FBI’s investigation, 2) the…