N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. ESM ER ALDA SEGOVIA C ONTRER AS, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 14-30121

D.C . No. 2:13-c r-02075-R HW -2 M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of W a shington R obe rt H. W

ha le y , Se nior Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d July

6, 2015 ** Se a ttle , W a s hington B e fore : KLEINFELD, NGUYEN, a nd FR IEDLAND, C i rc uit Judge s . De fe nda nt Esm e ra lda

Se govia C o ntre ra s a

ppe a l s the distric t c ourt’ s de nia l of the m otion to suppre ss he r post-a rre st sta te m e nts to a

n FB I a ge nt. Afte r the de nia l, C ontre ra s e nte re d a

c onditional ple a

for c o nspira c y

to kidna p a m inor. W e have 

# FIL E D JUL 09 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo the a de qua c y of a M iranda wa rning, the invoc a tion of theright to c ounse l, a nd the volunta

rine ss of a sta te m e nt to a l aw e nforc e m e nt offic e r, and we re vie wunde rly ing fa c t ua l findings for c l e ar e rror. Unite d State s v. Younge r, 398 F.3d 1179, 1185 (9th C ir. 2005); Unite d State s v. W olf, 813 F.2d 970, 974 (9th C ir. 1987). W e a ffirm . The wa rnings give n in this c a se c onve y e d to C ontre ra s he r rights a s re quire d by M iranda v. Ariz ona , 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Se e Unite d State s v. M igue l , 952 F.2d 285, 287–88 (9th C ir. 1991). R e a ding from the loc a l polic e de pa

rtm e nt’ s Spanish la

ngua ge tra

n sla tion c ard, the a ge nt who spe aks flue nt Spa n ish sta te d “ [i] f y ou c annot a fford an

attorne y , one will be a

ppointe d for y ou to re p re se nt y ou if y ou wish be fore the que stioning,” am ong othe r things. C ontre ra s’ s a rgum e nt tha

t the s tat e m e nt wa s ina d e quate be c a use it did not sa

y “ a t no c ost” or “ fre e ” is unsupporte d. Id. a

t 288 (“ ‘ [R ] e vie wing c ourts . . . ne e d not e xam ine M iran da warnings a s if c onstruing a will or de fining thete rm s of a n e a se m e nt.’ Inste a d of foc u sing on onese n te nc e in isola tion, thec ourt looke d to the wa rning a s a whole and found tha

t the y fully

inform e d the suspe c t of his rights unde r M iranda .” (quoting Duc k

worth v. Ea ga

n, 492 U.S. 195, 203 (1989)) (c ita t ion om itte d)). The a ge nt did not make any

m isle a ding sta

te m e nt to C ontre ra s. C f. Duc kworth, 492 2U.S. at 203–04 (noting tha t a sta te m e nt tha

t the offic e rs c annot givea suspe c t a la wy e r but one will be a

p pointe d “ if a

nd whe n y ou go to c ourt” is a c c ura te ).

The re c ord doe s not support C ontre ra s’ s re m a ining c l a im s. She did not m ake an una

m biguous re que st for c ounse l. Se e Younge r, 398 F.3d a t 1187 (“ [R ] e fe re nc e to a

n attorne y tha t is a m biguous or e quivoc a l . . . doe s not re quire the c e ssation of que stioning.” (quoting Da

vis v. Unite d Stat e s, 512 U.S. 452, 459 (1994)) (e llipsis in origina l) (bra c ke t s om itte d)); se e a l so C la rk v. M urphy , 331 F.3d 1062, 1071 (9th C ir. 2003), ov e rrule d on othe r grounds by Loc ky e r v. Andra de , 538 U.S. 63, 71 (2003). We c onc lude that C ontre ra s’ s sta

te m e nts we re m a de volunta

rily . The re is no e vide nc e tha t the offic e rs use d c oe rc ion or im prope r induc e m e nt. Se e Unite d State s v. Le on Gue rre ro, 847 F.2d 1363, 1366 (9th C ir. 1988) (“ The te st is whe the r, c onside ring the tota lity of the c irc um sta

nc e s, the gove rnm e nt obta ine d the sta te m e nt by phy sic a l or psy c h ologic a l c oe rc ion or by im prope r induc e m e n t

so tha t the suspe c t’ s will wa s ove rborne .” ).

AFFIRM E D.

3