United States v. Michael Barnes

Michael D. Barnes appeals his conviction for distribution of controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Reviewing de novo, United States v. Rodgers, 656 F.3d 1023, 1026 (9th Cir.2011), we consider the denial of Barnes’s motion to suppress statements he made to Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) agents during a meeting with his parole officer. Because the meeting was a custodial interrogation, Miranda warnings were required to allow the prosecution to use Barnes’s statements at trial. Engaging in a “two-step interrogation” prohibited by Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 , 124 S.Ct. 2601 , 159 L.Ed.2d 643 (2004) (plurality opinion), the agents deliberately delayed giving warnings to induce Barnes’s cooperation in an ongoing investigation. Although the target of the agents’ inquiry was ostensibly another suspect, the questioning necessarily elicited information that incriminated Barnes. The midstream warnings provided after Barnes incriminated himself were too little, too late. The district court’s failure to suppress the statements was in error. At trial the confession was central to the conviction. Because the error was not harmless…