[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

19 experience with the criminal justice system. United States v. Garibay, 143 F.3d 534, 538 (9th
20 Cir. 1998).  The government s burden to make such a showing is great, and the court will
21 indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver of fundamental constitutional rights.
22 United States v. Garibay, 143 F.3d 534, 537 (9th Cir. 1998) (quotation marks and citation
23 omitted).
24 The government has borne its burden to show by a preponderance of the
25 evidence defendant s waiver was knowing and voluntary, by providing the transcript of the
26 interrogation. The portions of the transcript already cited reveal a sophisticated journalist
27 fluent in English. While the agents did not explicitly ask defendant whether he understood his
28 rights, they did say  ok? after informing him of his rights, to which defendant replied  yea.
24
Case 2:13-cr-00082-KJM Document 34 Filed 03/24/14 Page 25 of 25
1 Tr. at 2. Moreover, defendant explained why he decided to talk to the agents:  This is one of
2 the reasons why I m talking to you as opposed to saying, you know, I want a lawyer, or I want
3 to talk to, you know, counsel at Tribune, or, again I m sorry, Reuters or anything like that is
4 because, you know, I did it. Tr. at 53. Defendant also stated he would be willing to be a
5 cooperating witness if that would help him avoid publicity. Tr. at 65. Defendant also provided
6 agents a written statement, although the record does not reveal whether that statement contains
7 a written waiver of his Miranda rights.
8 The record also is silent as to whether defendant has had prior experience with
9 the criminal justice system. But the record as a whole, including the transcript of the
10 interrogation, point to one inescapable conclusion: defendant is a worldly, educated, intelligent
11 person. The totality of the circumstances show by a preponderance of the evidence that
12 defendant waived his Miranda rights  with a full awareness both of the nature of the right
13 being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.  Derrick, 924 F.2d at
14 820.
15 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant s motion to suppress evidence,
16 ECF No. 23, is DENIED.
17 DATED: March 23, 2014.
18
19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
25 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]