U.S. v. Johnson

In prosecution on drug distribution and firearm charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress three separate inculpatory statements made after defendant had been stopped while driving vehicle, after officer began reading search warrant to defendant, and after defendant had been taken to police statement, where defendant claimed that all three statements had been taken in violation of his Miranda rights. First statement, which was made during initial traffic stop, did not violate Miranda since defendant was not in custody at any time during his routine traffic stop. Moreover, while defendant was in custody at time of second statement, he was not subjected to interrogation where officer was merely reading copy of search warrant at time of statement. Also, defendant failed to establish Miranda violation with respect to third statement since record showed that he had been given Miranda warnings prior to that statement, and Ct. rejected defendant's claim that said statement was tainted due to prior violations of Miranda.