United States v. Kanda

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
October 23, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-11357
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALAIN KAJA KANDA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:02-CR-78-1-Y
--------------------
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alain Kaja Kanda appeals from his conviction by guilty plea
of possessing counterfeit currency. Kanda’s plea was conditioned
on preserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to
suppress the written statement he provided to agents of the
United States Secret Service. Kanda contends that the district
court erred by denying his motion to suppress his written
statement.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-11357
-2-
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
Government and with due regard to the district court’s
opportunity to judge the credibility of the witnesses, the
district court did not err by denying the motion to suppress.
See United States v. Coleman, 969 F.2d 126, 129 (5th Cir. 1992).
The testimony of the Secret Service agents at the suppression
hearing indicated that Kanda understood the English language,
that he was given the Miranda warnings three times, and that the
statement was a verbatim account of Kanda’s words that was
reviewed and approved by Kanda. The agents’ testimony also
indicated that the circumstances in which Kanda provided the
statement were not inherently coercive. Kanda agreed to
accompany the agents to the field office, his handcuffs were
removed once the group arrived at the field office, and he was
agreeable to being placed in the interrogation room. The
interview during which Kanda provided the statement began less
than half an hour after the group arrived at the field office,
and the interview itself lasted for about an hour. Finally,
Kanda never asked to leave, nor did he otherwise indicate that he
wished to end the interview. Assuming for the sake of argument
that Kanda was in custody when he was interviewed, he knowingly
and voluntarily waived his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384
U.S. 436 (1966), before he gave his written statement. See
United States v. Andrews, 22 F.3d 1328, 1337 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --