United States v. Pons-Pagan

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff v. LUIS PONS-PAGAN, a/k/a "Pili…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

Date published: May 2, 2016

CRIMINAL 14-0189CCC (D.P.R. May. 2, 2016)

Opinion

CRIMINAL 14-0189CCC

05-02-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff v. LUIS PONS-PAGAN, a/k/a "Pili" Defendant

CARMEN CONSUELO CEREZO United States District Judge

ORDER

Having considered the Motion to Suppress filed by defendant Luis Pons-Pagán (d.e. 29), the United States' Opposition (d.e. 43), the U.S. Magistrate-Judge's Report and Recommendation (d.e. 48) and defendant's Objections to the Report and Recommendation (d.e. 52), as well as the relevant case law, said Report and recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED and defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.

While defendant sough suppression of two firearms and ammunition found in his vehicle claiming that the consent he gave to search his vehicle was obtained by law enforcement agents prior to being Mirandized, the U.S. Magistrate-Judge aptly concluded, as repeatedly held by case law, that a consent to search is not considered a self-incriminating statement and does not require prior Miranda warnings. See e.g. United States v. Saenz, 474 F. 3d 1132, 1137 (8th Cir. 2007); United States v. McCurdy, 40 F.3d 1111 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hidalgo, 7 F.3d 1566, 1568 (11th Cir. 1993); United States v. Smith, 3 F.3d 1088, 1098 (7th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1061, 114 S.Ct. 733, 126 L.Ed. 2d 696 (1994); Cody v. Solem, 755 F.2d 1323, 1330 (8th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833, 106 S.Ct. 104, 88 L.Ed. 2d 84 (1985). In any event, as the Magistrate-Judge also correctly observed, the firearms and ammunition would had been inevitably discovered by the customary inventory search of the vehicle which would have followed its impoundment. See United States v. Infante-Ruiz, 13 F.3d 498, 503 (1st Cir. 1994).

The parties are GRANTED until JUNE 6, 2016 to conclude plea negotiations and, if these are successful, defendant is allowed until JUNE 16, 2016 to file a change of plea motion. The jury trial is RESET for JULY 8, 2016 at 9:30 AM.

Defendant's Motion Requesting Order (d.e. 55) is DENIED. His Informative Motion (d.e. 56) is NOTED.

SO ORDERED.

At San Juan, Puerto Rico, on May 2, 2016.

S/CARMEN CONSUELO CEREZO

United States District Judge