United States of America, and v. Ascencion Vasquez-Lopez, And
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
Decision
2Per curiam
Here at the time of arrest for illegal possession of marijuana some warning of constitutional rights was given the defendant. An agent testified first on direct examination as to the warning. The warning seems to substantially comply with the requirements of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694.
But on cross examination, the agent (who had given the warning in Spanish) was asked to state what were the Spanish words used. He did so on the stand. These words, when translated, seem to lack the element of a right to an attorney “now” before speaking. We…
3Cases cited1 opinion
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
4Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Irene Rubio GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- United States v. RawlsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1974
- In re Guyette for a Writ of Habeas CorpusDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1972