United States v. Stone

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Samuel Richard Stone (“Stone”) appeals his conviction and sentence for two counts of second degree murder on the grounds that: (1) the district court should have suppressed Stone’s statements because they were the product of improper collaboration between the tribal police and federal authorities; (2) the district court failed to reduce Stone’s sentence based on acceptance of responsibility under § 3E1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines; and (3) the district court wrongly found that Stone’s conviction for attempted child molestation was a crime of violence under § 4B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 . The parties are familiar with the facts such that we need not repeat them.

We review a district court’s denial of a motion to suppress de novo. United States v. Percy, 250 F.3d 720, 725 (9th Cir.2001). The district court did not err in denying the portion of Stone’s motion to suppress statements made between November 19-30, 1999, because the statements were voluntary and Stone was given full Miranda warnings prior to making them. Moreover, because there was no evidence of improper collaboration…