United States v. Dana Nida , 457 F. App'x 250 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 11-4487
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DANA NIDA,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Charleston.  John T. Copenhaver,
    Jr., District Judge. (2:10-cr-00046-1)
    Submitted:   November 28, 2011            Decided:   December 14, 2011
    Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Barry P. Beck, POWER, BECK, & MATZUREFF, Martinsburg, West
    Virginia, for Appellant.    R. Booth Goodwin II, United States
    Attorney, John L. File, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Beckley, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Dana Nida was convicted, following a jury trial, of
    conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, distribution
    of cocaine base, possession with intent to distribute cocaine,
    possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking
    offense, and felon in possession of a firearm.                      He appeals,
    arguing that the district court erred in denying his motion to
    suppress his custodial statement.           We affirm.
    Surveilling    narcotics          officers     having       developed
    probable cause to believe that Nida was using and selling crack
    cocaine in his residence, they attempted to arrest him when he
    stepped   outside.    When     he   retreated    into    the   residence,     the
    detectives forcibly entered the residence and placed Nida under
    arrest.    Nida had initially refused to speak to the police as
    they approached and before he retreated into the residence.
    After Nida was arrested, he was taken to the police
    station   and   advised   of    his    rights    pursuant      to   Miranda   v.
    Arizona, 
    384 U.S. 436
     (1966).              Nida signed a waiver of these
    rights,   acknowledging      his      understanding      of    them     and   his
    willingness to speak with the arresting officer.                      During the
    interview that followed, Nida admitted that he had purchased
    cocaine, cooked some powder cocaine into crack cocaine, traded
    crack for Hydrocodone pills, and possessed a firearm.                     At no
    time during this interview did Nida state that he no longer
    2
    wished    to     speak    with        the    officer        or    otherwise          give     any
    indication       that    he     did    not     want    to        answer    the       officer’s
    questions.       Under these circumstances, even assuming that Nida
    validly invoked his right to silence before he was physically
    apprehended      after    retreating         into     his    residence,         we    conclude
    that the district court did not err in denying the motion to
    suppress.        See    Michigan      v.     Mosley,    
    423 U.S. 96
    ,    106    (1975)
    (providing factors to consider in determining whether an accused
    has    waived    the    right    to     remain      silent,       which    he    previously
    asserted).
    Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
    We    dispense    with    oral     argument       because        the     facts   and        legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-4487

Citation Numbers: 457 F. App'x 250

Judges: Shedd, Davis, Diaz

Filed Date: 12/14/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024