USCA1 Opinion

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit
____________________

No. 95-1871

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellant,

v.

AMADO FERNANDEZ VENTURA AND MILAGROS A. CEDENO,

Defendants, Appellees.

____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

[Hon. Jose Antonio Fuste, U.S. District Judge]

___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge,

___________
Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge,
____________________
and Cyr, Circuit Judge.
_____________

____________________

David S. Kris, Attorney,

______________

with whom

Guillermo Gil, United Sta

_____________

Attorney, Antonio R. Bazan, Assistant United States Attorney, and N

________________
_
Goodman, Attorney, were on brief for appellant.
_______
Linda Backiel with
______________

whom Carlos Ramirez Fiol

_____________________

appellees.

____________________

May 30, 1996

____________________

was on

brief

COFFIN, Senior Circuit Judge.

_____________________

After deplaning

at San Juan

International Airport,

Milagros Cedeno

for illegally

5316.

defendants

Amado Fernandez

were questioned

by Customs agents

transporting money,

in violation

Ventura

and

and arrested

of 31 U.S.C.

They filed a motion to suppress all inculpatory statements

made in the absence of Miranda warnings, which was

_______

government appealed.

Having

concluded that the

granted.

The

district court

applied an erroneous legal test, we remand for reconsideration of

the suppression motion under the proper standard.

BACKGROUND

Facts
_____

Because

Puerto

Customs

of

his frequent

Rico, Fernandez

Service.

On

was

travel

on a

November

between

"lookout"

12,

1994,

St. Maarten

list kept

after

by

and

the

clearing

immigration,

Fernandez

was

to

inspection

area.

any money;

Fernandez responded "$8000."

his

One agent

taken

suitcase, discovered

belonged to.

secondary

asked Fernandez if

women's

or "my woman."

Customs

he was carrying

Another agent searched

lingerie, and

Fernandez answered "mi

means "my wife"

asked whom

it

mujer," which colloquially

Fernandez was directed

to find

her.

Cedeno,

but

was

still

accompanied

the

Fernandez's girlfriend, had already cleared customs

within

the

customs

area.

Fernandez,

while

by an agent, located Cedeno and returned with her to

secondary inspections

area.

-2-

On the

way there,

the agent

asked Cedeno whether

she was

carrying any money.

She

replied

that she was carrying approximately $9,000.

in

search of the defendants revealed

their

possession

questioning, Fernandez

money

was

$16,166.

revealed that

exchange company, of which

then placed the couple

In

that the actual amount

response

to

the money belonged

he was president.

under arrest and read them

further

to his

The agents

their Miranda
_______

rights.

The

defendants

transportation of

were charged

monetary instruments

violation of 31 U.S.C.

Customs

motion

failing

in excess of

of 18 U.S.C.

Miranda violation,
_______

was

carrying any

money.

See
___

1001.

the court

statements made by the defendants after Cedeno

she

to report

the

$10,000 in

5316, and making false statements to the

Service in violation

alleging a

with

Upon their

suppressed all

was asked whether

United States
_____________

v. Fernandez
_________

Ventura, 892 F. Supp. 362 (D.P.R. 1995).

_______

The District Court's Opinion

____________________________

The

district court delineated

determining whether

the rule

four relevant

enunciated in Miranda
_______

384 U.S. 436 (1966), has been violated:

inquiries for

v. Arizona,
_______

1.

Was the person in "custody"?

2.

Was the person "interrogated"?

3.

Had

incrimination
4.

the

Fifth

Amendment

right

against

self-

attached?

Had the Sixth Amendment right to counsel attached?

Under the court's analysis, a violation occurs when "each element

(custody,

un-Mirandized

interrogation, and

attached

Sixth Amendment rights) . . . exist[s] simultaneously."

-3-

Fifth and

The court considered

"depends

exclusively upon

defendant's position

"Customs

individual

is

concluded that

never

whether

free

free to

coercive

to

defendants were

It stated that

a reasonable

would have felt

an inherently

is

each factor.

walk

in "custody."

person in

leave."

environment

simply

custody

the

Because

[in that]

away,"

the

In the

an

court

court's

view, "interrogation" was satisfied because "[t]he parties do not

dispute that all of the questioning conducted by Customs officers

in this case constituted 'interrogation' as defined and explained

in Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980)."

____________
_____

Most of the

court's analysis focused on

to silence and counsel had attached.

context of

Customs interrogation,

whether the rights

The court held that "in the

these rights attach

when the

questioning has ceased to be purely investigatory

accusatory."

and has become

Elaborating further, the court explained

[This] has

both an

objective and

The objective element[]

Miranda warnings when
_______

subjective element.

requires that officers provide

there exists

probable cause

to

make

an arrest . . . . The subjective element requires

that

officers

apparent

provide

that the

Miranda
_______

warnings

when it

interrogating officer's

is

purpose in

questioning is not purely investigatory.

As applied in the Customs setting:

when the

questioning extends beyond that

average

Customs

interrogee

secondary inspection, we

at

either

infer that the

asked of the
primary

or

interrogation

has become sufficiently focused upon the interrogee

to

require Miranda warnings.

_______

Applying

the

facts to

these

legal

standards, the

court

concluded that the "interrogation turned accusatorial at the time

Inspector

Fisher

asked

Cedeno

whether she

was

carrying

any

-4-

money."

At that point, the "investigation

to a particular

we infer to

Accordingly,

crime with particular defendants,

have been

the

had clearly narrowed

court

substantial, particularized

determined,

all

ensuing

violated Miranda, and were properly suppressed.

_______

based on what

suspicions."

statements

DISCUSSION

The government claims

violation

was legally

that the court's

erroneous.

test for a

Defendants concede

Miranda
_______

that the

court's approach was novel, but argue that, taken as a

whole, it

comports

appeal is

with settled

straightforward:

Supreme Court

district

to set

precedent.

Our task

in this

forth the Miranda test as

_______

and First Circuit

court followed it.

caselaw and assess

Our standard

derived from

whether the

of review is de novo.
__ ____

See United States v. Lewis, 40 F.3d 1325, 1332 (1st Cir. 1994).
___ _____________
_____

Miranda warnings must be given before a suspect is subjected

_______

to custodial interrogation.

(1st

Cir.

1993).

The

United States v. Taylor, 985 F.2d 3,

_____________
______

custodial

interrogation

inquiry

necessarily

demands

determination

components:

1) custody and

of

its

2) interrogation.

two

See Illinois v.
___ ________

Perkins, 496 U.S. 292, 297 (1990) ("It is the premise

_______

that

the danger

of

coercion results

from

subsidiary

of Miranda
_______

the interaction

of

custody and official interrogation.").

The custody determination is the initial and, generally, the

central

inquiry:

warnings."

1987).

it is "the touchstone

United States v.
_____________

Since

to the need for Miranda

_______

Quinn, 815 F.2d 153, 160 (1st

_____

Miranda, the Court has enunciated

_______

-5-

Cir.

several general

definitions of custody, but the ultimate inquiry is whether there

was

"a formal arrest or restraint on

degree associated

with a formal

116

465

S.

Ct. 457,

(1995)

freedom of movement of the

arrest."

(quotation

omitted); Stansbury v. California, 114

_________
__________

Thompson
________

marks

v. Keohane,
_______

and

citations

S. Ct. 1526, 1529

(1994)

(per curiam) (same).1

___ ______

In order to assess the "restraint on freedom of movement," a

court

must

interrogation.

examine

all

This test

the

is

circumstances

objective:

surrounding

the

only

the

relevant

inquiry is "how

a reasonable

man in the

have understood his situation."2

(quoting Berkemer v.
________

subjective

Stansbury, 114 S. Ct.

_________

McCarty, 468
_______

beliefs held

by

U.S. 420, 442

the interrogating

person being interrogated are not germane.

Relevant

questioned

number

circumstances

in familiar

of law

or

suspect's shoes

include

at least

enforcement officers

would

at 1529

(1984)).

The

officers or

the

Id.
___

"whether the

suspect

was

neutral surroundings,

the

present

at the

scene, the

____________________

This

specific

formulation was

first

articulated

in

California v.
__________

Beheler, 463 U.S.

_______

1121, 1125 (1983)

(per curiam)
___ ______

and Minnesota
_________

v. Murphy, 465 U.S. 420, 430 (1984).

______

It served to

clarify

the

Court's conception

that

Miranda
_______

applied after

"person

has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his

freedom of action in any significant

way."

Miranda, 384 U.S. at

_______

444 (footnote omitted).

In

Keohane,
_______

the Court

determination of custody

is a

made

clear that

mixed question of

the

ultimate

fact and

law.

The initial examination of the "totality of the circumstances" is

factual.
these

The second
circumstances

freedom of
arrest"

movement

-- requires

inquiry, however -constitute

of

the

the

whether, objectively,

requisite

degree associated

the "application

standard to the historical facts."

-6-

of the

"restraint
with

on

formal

controlling legal

116 S. Ct. at 465 & n.11.

degree

of physical

restraint placed upon

duration and character

Masse, 816 F.2d 805,

_____

v.

of the interrogation."

(discussing

Pratt,
_____

factors

in

645 F.2d

the

United States
_____________

(1st Cir. 1986)).

89,

context

90-91 (1st

of

and the

United States v.
_____________

809 (1st Cir. 1987) (quoting

Streifel, 781 F.2d 953, 961 n.13

________

United States v.
______________

the suspect,

See also
___ ____

Cir.

secondary

1981)

customs

search).3

Determining

task.

See
___

what constitutes

custody can

Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298,

______
______

be a

"slippery"

309 (1985).

Through

case by case development, however, courts have carved out certain

circumstances

See, e.g.,
___ ____

as

legally

insufficient

Berkemer, 468 U.S.

________

to

constitute custody.

at 437-40 (routine

traffic stops

not subject to

996

F.2d

dictates of Miranda); United States v. Tajeddini,

_______
_____________
_________

1278,

questioning);

1288

(1st

Pratt, 645 F.2d at

_____

Cir.

1993)

(routine

90-91 (same).

Customs

Indeed, in the

Customs context, we have stated that questions from officials are

especially understood to be a necessary and important routine for

travelers arriving at American entry points.

at 90.

Cir.

See Pratt, 645 F.2d

___ _____

See also United States v. Moya, 74 F.3d 1117, 1120 (11th

___ ____ _____________
____

1996).

coercive

This

against the

potentially

aspect of the Customs inquiry, and lessens the need for

Miranda warnings.
_______

secondary

understanding cuts

inspection

____________________

In

does

Pratt,
_____

not

per
___

we

made

se
__

clear

constitute

that

even

custodial

This

is not

an

exhaustive list.

identified other factors significant

See
___

Other

courts

have

to a custody determination.

Sprosty v. Buchler, 79 F.3d 635, 641 (7th Cir. 1996) (citing

_______
_______

cases).

-7-

interrogation.

required to

some

acknowledged

submit to a

increased

perception

We

level

. . . is

that

though

secondary customs search

of

official

suspicion[,]

not sufficient by

"[a]ny

person

may apprehend

this

itself to apply coercive

pressures equivalent to custodial questioning."

There,

we found

that

the limited

and

645

F.2d at 90.

routine nature

of

the

questioning and short duration of the encounter militated against

requiring

Miranda warnings.
_______

The

line between

questioning and custodial interrogation

routine Customs

is not easily drawn, but

it requires careful examination of all the circumstances.

The

course,

other

interrogation.

questioning

words

component

of

custodial

Interrogation

interrogation

refers to

both

is,

of

express

and its "functional equivalent," which includes "any

or actions on

normally attendant

the part

of the

police (other

than those

to arrest and custody) that the police should

know are

reasonably likely

from the

suspect."

to elicit an

Rhode Island v.
_____________

incriminating response

Innis, 446
_____

U.S. 291,

301

(1980) (footnotes omitted).

Again the inquiry is objective:

would the

officer's statements

reasonable

person in the same

and

conduct be

circumstances?

-8-

perceived by

See
___

how

Taylor, 985
______

F.2d at 7.4

Here, quite clearly, if defendants were in

custody,

the officers' express questions constituted interrogation.5

In

subject

summary,

Miranda
_______

to custodial

warnings

ensure that

interrogation has

an

a "full

opportunity to

exercise the privilege against self-incrimination."

U.S. at 467.

first

examine

To

find custodial interrogation,

all

the circumstances

individual

Miranda, 384
_______

the court

surrounding

must

the exchange

between the government agent and the suspect, then determine from

the perspective

of a

reasonable person

in the

suspect's shoes

whether there was 1) a formal

movement of the

arrest or restraint on freedom

degree associated

with a formal

arrest and

of

2)

express questioning or its functional equivalent.

We

court's

will not

dwell

version

of the

significant errors.

and

on all

the

problems in

Miranda inquiry,
_______

First,

but

the

district

point out

the court took the ultimate

a few

factual

legal question -- were defendants in custody? -- and treated

it in

a per se manner:
___ __

because travelers "may

not simply walk

____________________

However, an

officer's knowledge "'concerning the unusual

susceptibility of a defendant to a particular form of

might be an important
reasonably should have

persuasion

factor in determining' what the

known."

Pennsylvania v.
____________

[officer]

Muniz, 496 U.S.

_____

582, 601 (1990) (quoting Innis, 446 U.S. at 302 n.8).

_____

We note

constitutes

that not all questioning of

interrogation

triggering

in-custody suspects

the Miranda

protections.

_______
For

example,

many

courts

recognize

"routine

interrogation" exception to the Miranda rule.

_______
v.

Doe,
___

878 F.2d

Requesting

1546, 1551

biographical

(1st

rarely elicits an incriminating

administrative

need.

elicit information
apply.

Id.
___

Id.
___

See United States

___ _____________

Cir. 1989)

information --

booking

(citing cases).

name, address,

etc. -____

response and serves a legitimate

If, however,

the officer

that may incriminate, the

seeks to

exception does not

We express no opinion on whether this narrow Miranda

_______

exception applies in the Customs setting.

-9-

away from an interrogating

officer," they are in custody.

is simply wrong. Individuals subject

customs inspections, circumstances

rarely free to leave

to routine traffic stops or

which are not custodial,

while being questioned by an

relevant inquiry, however, as stated above, is

an

arrest

or restraint

This

on freedom

of

officer.

are

The

whether there was

movement of

the degree

associated with a formal arrest.

The court's

would

further assertion

agree that

regardless

of

the

directly contrary

runs counter

Court.

Customs

is an

circumstances

to our

to the proper

custody

that "all

reasonable people

inherently custodial

of

decisions in

the

interrogation,"

Tajeddini and
_________

approach articulated by

determination

requires

setting,

inquiry

is

Pratt and
_____

the Supreme

into

all
___

circumstances surrounding the interrogation.

See Keohane, 116 S.

___ _______

Ct. at 465 & n.11.

Finally, we note that the court, relying on outmoded circuit

opinions, discussed

certain factors,

probable cause to make an

certain courts

United States
______________

v.

found these

Henry, 604
_____

approach.

objective

on the

a Miranda inquiry.
_______

factors relevant,

F.2d

(articulating a four-factor test

factors), but

there was

arrest and the officers' focus

defendants, which are not relevant to

time,

such as whether

908,

915

At one

see, e.g.,
___ ____

(5th Cir.

1979)

for custody that included these

subsequent Supreme

Court decisions

rejected this

See, e.g., Berkemer, 468 U.S. at 442 (emphasizing the

___ ____ ________

nature of

the inquiry).

Indeed,

in light

of these

cases,

the

Fifth

Circuit

repudiated

its

four-factor

test,

-10-

announcing that

the

custody

person's

"[p]robable cause

inquiry

perception

only

of

Bengivenga, 845 F.2d 593,

__________

(footnote omitted).

when

the

and focus become

they

influence

situation."

material to

reasonable

United States
______________

596-97, 597 (5th Cir. 1988)

v.

(en banc)
__ ____

Defendants argue that the court's test, taken as a whole, is

consistent

be tests

with our precedent.

which, though

We disagree.

formulated differently,

proper standard, this is not one of them.

this

case to the district

legal test.

Although there may

approximate the

Accordingly, we remand

court for application

of the correct

On remand, the court may take additional evidence on

the relevant factual issues.

See Streifel, 781 F.2d at 962.

___ ________

The order suppressing evidence is vacated. We remand to the

____________________________________________________________

district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

____________________________________________________________

-11-