Court Opinion

ID: 9458138
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 20:43:55.941054+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:39.106457
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
I maintain the view expressed in my dissent in Kills Crow v. United States, 451 F.2d 323, 327 (CA8 1971), that once a federal court properly acquires jurisdiction over a federal crime, it possesses jurisdiction over any crime which is necessarily included therein. For this reason, I would reverse on the lesser offense issue. However, I join the majority in its disposition of the other questions presented by this case.
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION
PER CURIAM.
 We remanded this case to the district court for further proceedings to determine the voluntariness of the confession in the light of the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 3501. The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and held that the delay between the probable cause for arrest and the defendant’s confession was not reasonable; that such unreasonableness is not conclusive on the issue of the voluntariness of the confession; that the defendant was aware of his rights; that he was not coerced or threatened; and that from “a totality of the circumstances” the Court finds the confession to have been voluntarily given. We have considered the record and agree. In our opinion noncompliance with § 3501(c) does not of itself render the confession inadmissible. Such noncompliance is a factor, along with others, which must be given consideration by the trial court.
Affirmed.