Markham

United States v. Markham

Good Law
32 F. App'x 816
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 11, 2002No. 01-50177; D.C. No. CR-00-02095-BTMCalifornia703 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*817 MEMORANDUM

Appellant-Defendant Mace Adam Markham appeals his jury conviction and sentence for importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960, and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C § 841(a)(1). Markham claims that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated because he did not receive Miranda warnings before he made several statements which were used against him. He also claims that his conviction should be vacated because he was tried by a biased jury. Because the admission of Markham’s statements were either harmless error or not the result of custodial interrogation, and because his jury was not biased, we affirm the district court.

Markham was entitled to Miranda warnings if, when he made the statements at issue, he was in custody and being subjected to police interrogation. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 477-78 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

The record is clear that Markham’s statement: “If there is anything in my car you must have put it there” was not made in response to any interrogation, or any other words uttered, by Inspector Darrell Watson. Inspector Watson was conducting a routine…

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.