## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 0- 18 85

__ __ __ __ __ _
Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *

* Pl ai nt iff - App el le e *

* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s

v. * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e

* Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta

. W al te r Perr in

, * * Defen da nt - App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
Sub m it te d: Decem

be r 16 , 20 10 Fi le d: Octo be r 28 , 20 11 (co rrec te d No ve m be r 1, 2 01 1)

__ __ __ __ __ _
Befo re LOKEN and BYE, Circ ui t J ud ge s, an d M ARSHALL, Dis tri ct Ju dg e. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
MARS HALL, Dis tri ct Ju dg e.

W al te r Perr in ad m it te d po ss es si ng ch il d po rn og rap hy. He m ad e th is ad m is si on in hi s be dr oo m un de r qu es ti o n i n g b y Crai g Sch erer , a n ag en t wit h th e Im m ig rat io n

an d Cu st om s Enfo rcem en t arm of th e Dep art m en t of Hom el an d Secu rit y

. Age nt
Sch erer le d th e te am th at ex ecu te d a se arch warra nt lo ok in g fo r ch il d po rn og rap hy at
th e sm al l ho us e in Si ou x Fal ls whe re Perr in li ve d wit h hi s m ot he r, fiv e ot he r pe op le

,

an d m an y co m

pu te rs

. Uni te d St at es v. Bol l

, 63 5 F.3 d 34 0 (8 th C ir. 20 11 ) is a

The Hon or ab le D.P. Mar sh al l Jr
., Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern *
Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s, s it ti ng by des ig na ti on

.c o mp a n i on cas e. Afte r th e Dis tri ct Co ur t de ni ed Perr in ’s m ot io n to su pp res s h i s **

st at em en ts to Age nt Sch erer , Perr in pl ead ed gu il ty, res erv in g th e rig ht to ap pe al th e

su pp res si on rul in g.

The is su e is whe th er Perr in was in cu st od y whe n he co nf es se d t o Age nt
Sch erer

. If so , Perr in ’s st at em en ts m us t be su pp res se d be cau se th e Age nt ga ve Perr in

no Mir an da warn in gs be fo re t he qu es ti on in g. Mir an da v. Ari zo na , 38 4 U.S. 43 6 (1 96 6)

. If no t, th en hi s s t a t e men ts co m e in an d Perr in ’s co nv ic ti on st an ds

. W e

rev ie w th e Dis tri ct Co ur t’s de ci si on on cu st od y —a m ix e d q u e s ti on of la w an d
fact

— de no vo , an d it s fact ua l fin di ng s for cl ear erro r. Uni te d St at es v. LeBr un , 36 3
F.3 d 7 15 , 71 9 (8 th Cir . 20 04 ) ( en ba nc ).

1. “ The ul ti m at e qu e s t i on in de te rm in in g whe th er a pe rs on is in cu st od y fo r
pu rp os es of M

i r a n d a i s whe th er th ere is a fo rm al arre st or res tra in t on free do m of

m ov em en t of th e de gr ee as so ci at ed wit h a fo rm al arre st .” Uni te d St at es v. Cz ic hr ay , 37 8 F.3 d 82 2, 82 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ), cer t. de ni ed

, 54 4 U.S. 10 60 (2 00 5) (q u o t a t io ns

om it te d)

. Age nt Sch erer di d no t arre st Perr in be fo re qu es ti on in g hi m

. So th e
qu es ti on co m es do wn to th e si tu at io n’s res tra in ts

. E.g.
, Uni te d St at es v. Lo wen , 64 7
F.3 d 86 3, 86 7– 68 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ). W e co ns id er “ fir st , wha t were th e ci rcu m st an ces

su rro un di ng th e in te rro ga ti on ; an d se co nd

, gi ve n th os e ci rcu m st an ces , wou ld a

reas on ab le pe rs on ha ve fel t he or sh e was at li be rty to te rm in at e th e in te rro ga ti on an d
le av e[ ]” th e be dr oo m an d th e ho us e. J.D.B. v. No rt h Ca ro li na , 13 1 S.Ct

. 23 94
, 24 02 (2 01 1) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. W e do no t as k ho w Perr in pe rcei ve d th e si tu at io n; as th e Su pr em e Co ur t recen tl y em ph as iz ed in J.D.B.
, th e po in t is ho w a reas on ab le pe rs on

wou ld ha ve see n h is op ti on s i n t he cir cu m st an ces

. Ib id

.

Th e Hon or ab le Lawren ce L. Pi ers ol

, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e f o r t h e ** Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta

.

- 2

-The Dis tri ct Co ur t an al y zed th e cu st od y is su e thr ough the non- ex cl usi ve G rif fi n fact or s, as m od ifi ed by Cz ic hr ay an d la te r pr eced en t. U n i t e d S ta te s v. Gri

ff in
, 92 2
F.2 d 1 34 3 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 ). The p art ie s ar gu e th e cas e h ere t he same way . W it h t he

cau ti on th at Gri

ff in is si m pl y a ru br ic f

o r c o ns id eri ng th e ul ti m at e is su e, no t a

m an da to ry ch eck li st , we m ov e to th e m eri ts

. The di sp os it iv e qu es ti on rem ai ns : wou ld

a reas on ab le pe rs on in Perr in ’s ci rcu m st an ces ha ve co ns id ered hi m se lf free no t to

an swe r Age nt Sch erer ’s qu es ti on s an d l eav e th e p rem is es ?

2. Perr in do es no t as se rt cl ear erro r in an y of th e Dis tri ct C o u r t ’s fact ua l
fin di ng s. W e se e no ne

. Here, th en , is wha t ha pp en ed —“ th e ci rcu m st an ces

su rro un di ng [Per rin ’s] in te rro ga ti on [.]” Lo wen , 64 7 F.3 d at 86 7 (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

.

Afte r st at e in ve st ig at or s de te ct ed do wnl oa ds of ch il d po rn og rap hy at th e ho us e whe re Perri n li ve d, fede ral ag en ts go t a warra nt to se arch th e p rem is es

. At leas t six
of fic ers i n t a c t i cal ge ar en te red th e ho us e, whi le se ve ral Si ou x Fal ls po li ce of fic ers

se cu red th e pe rimeter. The se arch be ga n aro un d 1: 45 in th e aft ern oo n. Age nt Sch erer le d th e gr ou p ex ecu ti ng th e warra nt

. Perr in an d hi s m ot he r were in th e li vi ng ro om ;

an ot he r res id en t was in a be dr oo m

. A fo ur th res id en t (Terry Bo ll of th e rel at ed cas e)

was le av in g th e ho us e fo r wor k bu t cam e ba ck i n si de at th e of fic ers ’ req ue st

. The
of fic ers ha d al l fo ur pe op le st ay in th e li vi ng ro om wit h an arm ed of fic er. Thi s sm al l

ro om was cro wde d wit h fo ur res id en ts , two of fic ers , two do gs , an d lo ts of fu rn it ur e. Afte r th e pr em is es were swe pt , Age nt Sch erer ret rie ve d th e warra nt fro m hi s ve hi cl e

an d g av e it to Perri n’s m ot he r.

Age nt Sch erer to ld th e gr ou p f o u r t h i ng s: th e of

fic ers were lo ok in g fo r ch il d

po rn og rap hy; th e res id en ts were free to le av e; if an y on e rem ai ne d, he or sh e ha d to

st ay in th e li vi ng ro om ; an d he wan te d to as k qu es ti on s bu t no on e ha d to an swe r. The res id en ts in di cat ed as a gr ou p th at th ey un de rs to od . Agen t Sc he rer t he n b eg an
to ask ab ou t co m

pu te rs , acce ss to th em , and in te rn et us e. W he n he as ke d i f an y on e

us ed Lim ewir e, a fil e-s ha rin g so f t w a r e of te n as so ci at ed wit h ch il d po rn og rap hy,

- 3

-P e r r in an d Bo ll sa id y es

. Perr in av oi de d ey e co nt act wit h Sch erer , sl um pe d in h i s ch ai r, an d s ta rte d fi dg et in g.

P e r r i n was in hi s m id -twe nt ie s at th e ti m e. He ha d al way s li ve d wit h h i s

m ot he r. He was al way s in sp eci al ed uc at io n cl as se s un ti l he dr op pe d ou t du rin g hi s

se ni or y ear of hi gh sc ho ol

. His in te ll ect ua l fu nc ti on in g is su b- av erag e. Perr in ha d

wor ke d fo r m an y y ears at TC’s Refe ree res ta ur an t, fir st as a di sh was he r an d th en a fry

co ok

.

Age nt Sch erer as ke d Perr in if th ey co ul d ta lk pr iv at el y in Perr in ’s be dr oo m , a sh or t di st an ce away

. Perr in sa id y es an d th ey wen t. Fi ve to te n m in ut es ha d pas se d
si nc e Age nt Sch erer st art ed ta lk in g to th e gr ou p. Dete ct iv e Sean Koo is tra wen t to th e be dr oo m to o; he se arch ed th e ro om whi le Age nt Sch erer qu es ti on ed Perr in

, an d left
be fo re th e qu es ti on in g en de d. Afte r th ey en te red th e be dr oo m , Sch erer cl os ed th e do or bu t it rem ai ne d crac ke d op en

. Age nt Sch erer di d no t r e p e a t hi s earl ie r ad m on it io ns ab ou t Pe rri n b ei ng free to lea ve or n ot an swe r qu es ti on s.

Age nt Sch erer qu es ti on ed Perr in fo r ab ou t t e n minu te s. His si de arm was vi si bl e, bu t he ha d rem ov ed hi s pr ot ect iv e ve st

. He di d no t to uc h or th reat en Perr in

,

m ak e an y pr om is es , or rai se hi s vo ic e. The Age nt di d no t pe rcei ve th at Perr in ha d an y
tro ub le un de rs ta nd in g or an swe rin g qu es ti on s ab ou t in te rn e t us e an d ch il d

po rn og rap hy. Tho ug h ne it he r Perr in no r t h e of fic ers te st ifi ed at th e su pp res si on he ari ng ab ou t th e sp eci fic s of th e qu es ti on s an d th e an swe rs , Age nt Sch erer ’s rep or t

was ad m it te d wi th ou t o bjec ti on an d i t s um m ari zed Perri n’s ad m is si on s.

At t he en d o f th e be dr oo m qu es ti on in g, Agen t Sc he rer a nd Perri n re tu rn ed to
th e li vi ng ro om

. The re were co nv ers at io ns be twee n P erri n a nd hi s m ot he r, so m e of
whi ch in cl ud ed A g e n t S c he rer. The se arch en de d an ho ur an d a ha lf or so aft er it
be ga n. Age nt Sch erer di d no t arre st Perr in aft er th e be dr oo m qu es ti on in g or whe n th e of fic ers lef t t he ho m e.

- 4

-3. Co ns id eri ng th e to ta li ty o f th e ci rcu m st an ces , we ho ld th at Perri n was no t

in cu st od y whe n Age nt S c h e r e r q ue st io ne d hi m in Perr in ’s be dr oo m

. Mo st
im po rta nt ly, ab ou t te n m in ut es be fo reh an d, Age nt Sch erer ha d to ld P e r r i n an d th e th ree ot he r res id en ts pr es en t th at th ey co ul d le a v e a n d di d no t ha ve to an swe r
qu es ti on s if th ey st ay ed

. W e ha ve lo ng reg ard ed th es e ad m on it io ns as weig ht y in th e

cu st od y an al y si s. E.g.
, Gri ff in , 9 22 F.2 d at 13 49 –5 0. An d we h av e n ev er h el d th at

a p ers on was in cu st od y aft er rece iv in g th em

. Cz ic hr ay , 37 8 F.3 d at 82 6. Perr in

arg ue s th at Age nt Sch erer sh ou ld ha ve to ld hi m ag ai n, an d in di vi du al ly, be fo re
st art in g th e be dr oo m qu es ti on in g. W e di sa gr ee. The te n- m in ut e di st an ce be twee n th e
two ev en ts un de rm in es Perr in ’s arg um en t. W hi le we m ay so m e da y co nf ro nt a cas e whe re th e di s t a n c e b e t ween warn in g an d qu es ti on in g, in th e to ta li ty of th e ci rc u ms t a n c es , pu ts th e effi cacy of an of fic er’s or ig in al no -cu st od y st at em en ts in
do ub t, t hi s i s n ot th at cas e.

Beyond th e cl ear gr ou nd ru le s th at st art ed Age nt Sch erer ’s qu es ti on in g, ot he r ci rcu m st an ces in di cat e th at Perr in was no t in cu st od y in hi s be dr oo m

. He vo lu nt eere d

to go th ere. The qu es ti on in g la st ed ab ou t te n m in ut es

. The be dr oo m , li ke th e ho us e,

was po li ce do m in at ed

, as th e Dis tri ct Co ur t fo un d. A reas on ab le pe rs on wou ld ha ve
ta ke n so m e co mfo r t , ho wev er, in be in g in hi s own be dr oo m in st ead of an in te rro ga ti on ro om at th e po li ce st at io n. Co mpa re Cz ic hr ay , 37 8 F.3 d at 82 6– 27
, wi th
Gri ff in
, 92 2 F.2 d at 13 55 n.1 5. The be dr oo m do or was al m os t cl os ed ; bu t a crac ke d
be dr oo m do or pr es en ts a di ffer en t ob st acl e th an a cl os ed st or ag e-ro om do or bl oc ke d by a po li ce of

fic er. Co mpa re Uni te d St at es v. Cr ai gh ea d

, 53 9 F.3 d 10 73
, 10 86 (9 th
Ci r. 20 08 ). Neit he r Offi cer K o oi st ra no r Age nt Sch erer pr ev en te d Perr in fro m

ex erci si ng hi s rig ht to le av e—t he y di d no t ph y si cal ly res tra in hi m , an d no th in g of

reco rd su gg es ts th at th ey

po si ti on ed th em se lv es or a ct ed to in hi bi t Pe rri n’s ex it

.

Aga in st al l th is

, Perr in st res se s two po in ts : th e ov erwh el m in g po li ce pr es en ce

an d hi s su b- av erag e in te ll ig en ce. Neit he r po in t is di sp ut ed

. Bu t con si de rin g all th e

- 5

-ci rcu m st an ces su rro un di ng th e i n t e r r og at io n, whi ch we m us t do

, th e m an y of

fic ers
pr es en t an d Perr in ’s m e n t a l d e fic it s do no t es ta bl is h cu st od y

. W e ha ve he ld th at
ci rcu m st an ces m or e do m in at ed by po li ce were no t cu st od ia l. E.g.
, Cz ic hr ay , 37 8 F.3 d

at 82 5, 8 30 ; LeBr un , 36 3 F .3d at 7 18
, 72 4. Any warra nt sea rch is in he ren tl y po li ce do m in at ed ; th ere is n o t h i n g un to ward ab ou t th at ci rcu m st an ce. Perr in ’s m en ta lde fic it s arg um en t fai ls on th e fa c t s. Age nt Sch erer te st ifi ed th at Perr in ne it he r
ap pe ared to ha ve an y di ffi cu lt y res po nd in g to th e qu es ti on s in th e be dr oo m no r

ex hi bi te d an y un us ua l in te ll ect ua l de fic it

. Bec au se Perr in ha s no t cro ss ed th e fact ua l
th res ho ld

, we ne ed no t co ns id er th is i s s u e f u r t he r on th e la w. Uni te d St at es v. Gal cer an , 30 1 F.3 d 92 7, 92 9, 93 1 (8t h Cir. 20 02 ) ( pe r cur ia m ) (an al y zi ng th e is su e

as a m at te r of vo lu nt ari ne ss ); s e e a l s o U ni te d St at es v. Li tt le

, 18 F.3 d 14 99
, 15 05 (1 0t h C ir. 1 99 4) ( en ba nc ) (rei te rat in g o bjec ti ve na tu re o f th e in qu iry).

Hav in g c on si de red th e to ta li ty of th e su rro un di ng cir cu m st an ces de no vo , we ho ld th at Perr in was no t in cu st od y du rin g t he ten m in ut es of vo lu nt ary qu es ti on in g in hi s be dr oo m

. A reas on ab le pe rs on in hi s po si ti on wou ld ha ve fel t at li be rty no t to

an swe r Age nt Sch erer ’s qu es ti on s or le av e or b o t h

, jus t as Age nt Sch erer ad vi se d
Perr in an d hi s ho us em at es th ey co ul d do be fo re he as ke d an y qu es ti on s. No Mir an da

warn in gs were re qu ire d. We th eref or e affi rm

th e jud gm en t.

Affi rm ed

.

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

- 6

-