Opinion ID: 542793
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Evidence on the Motion to Suppress

Text: 2 Theresa Walley moved to suppress certain statements that she had given to government agents on the ground that she was not given her Miranda warnings, and the district court conducted a hearing on this motion on September 12, 1988. At the hearing, Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms Agent O.B. Combs testified that he and two other law enforcement officers approached Theresa Walley after she had come out of a suntanning establishment and gotten into her car. He stated that he identified himself and told her that he wanted to talk to her, and that she then asked if they could talk somewhere else. He testified that he agreed and that they followed her as she drove her car to another location. She then left her car and voluntarily got into the car with the officers. 3 Combs further testified that he explained to Walley that he knew of her cocaine-related activities and attempted to give her Miranda warnings. He claimed that after he told her that she had the right to an attorney and that anything she said could be used against her, she interrupted and stated that it looked like they knew everything anyway so she might as well tell them. He said she then made the incriminating statements. 4 Combs and another officer testified that they did not attempt to arrest Walley, did not physically restrain her, did not tell her that she could not leave, and that once she indicated that she did not want to answer any more questions, they stopped questioning her. 5 Theresa Walley testified that Combs had knocked on her car, showed her his badge, and told her to get in his car. She said she was scared and felt that she was going to jail. She claims that Combs never read her any rights and that the officers questioned her for two hours. She also claimed that they followed her home and came into her house. She further testified that she told the officers that she wanted to talk to a lawyer or her husband but that they continued to question her. 6 The district court credited the testimony of the questioning officers and concluded that [n]one of the facts would lead one to conclude that at any point Walley was 'in custody.'  The court held that Theresa Walley's rights were not violated and denied the motion.