United States v. Joel Castellon , 617 F. App'x 791 ( 2015 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
SEP 23 2015
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 14-50395
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-04414-LAB-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JOEL PALLARES CASTELLON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted August 31, 2015
Pasadena, California
Before: GRABER, RAWLINSON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Appellant Joel Pallares Castellon (Pallares) challenges the district court’s
denial of his motion to suppress. Pallares contends that the district court clearly
erred in holding that he knowingly and intelligently waived all of his Miranda1
rights. Pallares also asserts that waiver of his Miranda rights was involuntary
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
1
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
because the officer threatened to question Pallares’ son if he did not obtain a
statement from Pallares.
The district court did not make the requisite determination that Pallares
knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights. See United States v.
Perez-Lopez, 348 F.3d 839, 847-48 (9th Cir. 2003). The transcript of the interview
reflects that Pallares remained confused about the waiver of his rights despite the
officer’s explanations. Ultimately, Pallares never affirmed that he understood the
waiver of his rights.
At the evidentiary hearing, the interrogating officer conceded that the
wording of the waiver form was confusing. Pallares also presented undisputed
testimony from a Spanish language interpreter that the waiver form and the
officer’s explanations did not properly convey the waiver of Miranda rights in
Spanish. Because the Miranda warning was not conveyed “clearly and in a
manner that [was] unambiguous,” Pallares’ waiver was not knowing and
intelligent. Id. at 848 (citation omitted).2
REVERSED and REMANDED.
2
Because we conclude that Pallares did not knowingly and intelligently
waive his Miranda rights, we need not, and do not, decide if his waiver was
voluntary.
2