826 F.3d 450 (7th Cir. 2016), 15-3022, United States v. Patterson
| Citation | 826 F.3d 450 |
| Opinion Judge | BAUER, Circuit Judge. |
| Party Name | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CAMERON PATTERSON, Defendant-Appellant |
| Attorney | For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Nathaniel Whalen, Attorney, Office of The United States Attorney, Hammond, IN. For Cameron Patterson, Defendant - Appellant: Thomas N. O'Malley, Attorney, Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Inc, Fort Wayne, IN. |
| Judge Panel | Before BAUER, POSNER, and FLAUM, Circuit Judges. |
| Case Date | June 14, 2016 |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals, U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Page 450
Argued April 19, 2016
Page 451
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division. No. 1:13-cr-00065-TLS-SLC-2 -- Theresa L. Springmann, Judge.
For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Nathaniel Whalen, Attorney, Office of The United States Attorney, Hammond, IN.
For Cameron Patterson, Defendant - Appellant: Thomas N. O'Malley, Attorney, Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Inc, Fort Wayne, IN.
Before BAUER, POSNER, and FLAUM, Circuit Judges.
OPINION
Page 452
BAUER, Circuit Judge.
Miranda warnings have taken a foothold in American culture largely via crime drama television and film. Defendant-appellant, Cameron E. Patterson, argues Federal Bureau of Investigation agents violated his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination when they failed to give him Miranda warnings prior to interviewing him. The sole issue is whether Patterson was " in custody" when he made his incriminating statements, thereby implicating the Fifth Amendment and necessitating Miranda warnings. We find Patterson was not in custody for purposes of Miranda, and therefore affirm the district court's order denying the motion to suppress his statements.
I. BACKGROUND
On May 29, 2013, the PNC Bank in Ossian, Indiana, fell victim to an armed robbery. FBI Special Agent Stewart was assigned to investigate the robbery and determined Patterson to be a suspect. Stewart provided FBI task force officers with a list of addresses for Patterson. On July 23, 2013, FBI Task Force Officer Strayer checked some of the addresses and found Patterson at one: 4761 Holton Avenue. Strayer also saw a white Dodge Magnum that, according to information developed through the investigation, may have been purchased with the robbery proceeds, and saw Patterson enter and exit the residence twice and walk north along the street. Strayer called Stewart and told him of what he had seen.
The agents came up with a plan to approach Patterson. Stewart drove to the residence in a green, unmarked Ford Taurus; Strayer was in a dark colored, unmarked van. They found Patterson standing in a driveway between 3409 and 3417 Holton. Stewart parked his Taurus on one side and Strayer parked his van on the other side of 3409 Holton.
Both Strayer and Stewart were wearing casual street clothes; neither officer was in a uniform, but they were both armed. Each agent had a handgun holstered on his waist underneath his untucked shirt. Strayer got out of his van, announced himself as FBI, and asked Patterson two or three times to show his hands. As he was approaching Patterson, Strayer had his hand on his gun which remained in its holster. Stewart got out of his car, walked over to Patterson and Strayer, and showed Patterson his FBI credentials. Stewart explained to Patterson that his name came up in an investigation. When Patterson inquired about the investigation, Stewart said he did not want to discuss the details in the driveway. He then asked Patterson if he would be willing to go to Stewart's office to discuss the issue and " clear his name." Patterson said he was willing to talk with the agents.
Page 453
The agents and Patterson walked from the driveway to the passenger side of Stewart's car. Stewart asked Patterson if he had any weapons on him. Stewart then said, " Hey, just for officer safety reasons, let me just do a quick check." At that point, Patterson placed his hands spread out on top of Stewart's car and spread his legs, assuming a search-type stance. Stewart told Patterson not to do that because he did not want to " make a big scene out here." Stewart wanted to keep the interaction " low key," without attracting a lot of attention from passersby. Stewart told Patterson to get out of his search stance and asked him to raise his shirt so he could see his waistband. Patterson raised his shirt, showing the agents his waistband. Stewart performed a quick pat down of Patterson's outer pockets. Patterson lowered his shirt.
Stewart opened the front passenger door for Patterson. Stewart asked, " I just want to make sure you're voluntarily coming with us, correct?" Patterson responded in the affirmative. Patterson got into the front passenger seat of the car. Stewart got in the driver's seat. All of these events occurred in approximately three or four minutes.
Strayer drove his van to nearby Irwin Elementary because he did not want to leave his van parked on Holton. Strayer parked his van at the school and got into the backseat of Stewart's car, directly behind Patterson. On the way to the FBI office, located on the tenth floor of the First Source Bank Building at 200 East Main Street, the three engaged in small talk. Strayer drove his car into the public garage of the building and parked in a reserved spot. The three men took the public elevator up to the tenth floor. After exiting the elevator, the men walked down a hallway, past a law office that shares the floor with the FBI and to the front door of the FBI office. This front door was locked from the outside, but unlocked from the inside. It had a typical push bar to exit. To open the door, one of the agents swiped a keycard and punched a code into a keypad.
Immediately inside and to the left of the front entrance was a conference room. Like the front door, the conference room door was locked from the outside and unlocked from the inside. To enter the room, one of the agents swiped a keycard. The conference room door had a regular handle to exit. Inside the conference room was a rectangular table with chairs around it and miscellaneous office equipment stored along the walls. Patterson sat in a chair closest to the door with the door located at his " two o'clock" position. Stewart sat across from Patterson, on the side of the table away from the door, and Strayer sat near Stewart at a corner of the table. Stewart took notes. There was nothing between Patterson and the conference room door.
Although Stewart portrayed the interview as an opportunity for Patterson to " clear his name," Stewart intended to ask Patterson questions designed to illicit incriminating responses.
When asked about the bank robbery, Patterson denied any involvement and provided an alibi. Stewart accused Patterson of having been involved in the robbery. Stewart assured Patterson he could speak freely, as he was not going to be arrested that day. At the suppression hearing, Stewart could not recall the exact words he used, but he told Patterson something to the effect of: " [u]nless you tell me you murdered someone or something, that rose to that level of a crime, you're not going to be under arrest today." Patterson then confessed his and his cohorts' involvement in the robbery.
At the end of the interview, which lasted about two hours, Patterson asked about
Page 454
when they thought he would be arrested, as he had a family and wanted to get his affairs in order. Stewart told Patterson that an arrest warrant would likely be secured in a week or two. Patterson provided his phone number to Stewart and agreed to turn himself in. Stewart advised Patterson he would have time before he had to turn himself in, but that the time was limited. The agents offered to give Patterson a ride back, which Patterson accepted. The agents dropped Patterson off at his requested location.
At the time of Patterson's interview, the conference room was not equipped with recording equipment. The FBI's default policy was to not record interviews. If an agent wanted to record an interview, he or she had to obtain special permission to record in advance of the interview. In Patterson's case, Stewart did not seek advance approval to record the interview because he did not know in advance that the interview was going to occur. The plan for the day was to check the addresses and conduct some surveillance. Stewart did not know if they would even see Patterson, let alone whether Patterson would agree to speak with them. Stewart knew he did not have probable cause to arrest Patterson at that point, and that if Patterson did not agree to speak with the agents, Stewart would have walked away and no information would be obtained.
Patterson moved to suppress the incriminating statements that he contends were made in violation of Miranda. It is undisputed that no Miranda warnings were given prior to Patterson's interview. The district court denied Patterson's motion, finding he was not in custody for purposes of Miranda. Patterson pleaded guilty to violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d), armed bank robbery and assault with a dangerous weapon, and a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2, aiding and abetting of same, but preserved his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion to suppress.
II. DISCUSSION
In the seminal case of Miranda, the United States Supreme Court held that " the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). The Supreme Court also delineated those " procedural safeguards," which have come to be commonly known as Miranda warnings. Id. These warnings are not required in every instance of questioning by law enforcement. Oregon v. Mathiason, 429 U.S. 492, 495, 97 S.Ct. 711, 50 L.Ed.2d 714 (1977) (warnings not required " simply because the questioning takes place in the [police] station house, or...
To continue reading
Request your trial