United States v. Ernest James Perkins

94 F.3d 654 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ernest James PERKINS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-50442. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 7, 1996. Decided Aug. 15, 1996. Before: D.W. NELSON, T.G. NELSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Ernest James Perkins appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress. Perkins contends that statements he made in response to police questioning before receiving his Miranda warnings should be suppressed for two reasons: (1) he was detained not under a Terry stop, but an arrest, and (2) even if he was seized under a Terry stop, he was deprived of his freedom of action so significantly as to necessitate Miranda warnings. We affirm in part and reverse in part. 3 Like the district court, we find that Perkins was detained under a permissible Terry stop. Because the deputies were told that Perkins was an armed bank…