DocketNumber: 07-55581
Judges: Goodwin, Schroeder, Fisher
Filed Date: 1/27/2010
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/5/2024
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DERRICK LEE SLEDGE, No. 07-55581 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-03-01190-CAS v. MEMORANDUM * BEN CURRY**, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted January 15, 2010 Pasadena, California Before: GOODWIN, SCHROEDER and FISHER, Circuit Judges. Derrick Sledge, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his28 U.S.C. § 2254
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He argues the state court improperly denied his motion to suppress statements he made to police * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** Pursuant to Rule 43(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Ben Curry is substituted for L.R. Blanks as Warden. without first being advised of his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona,384 U.S. 436
, 444-45 (1966). The state court determined that Miranda warnings were not necessary because Sledge was not “in custody” when two police officers temporarily detained and briefly questioned him in the lobby of a bank before they arrested him. See Stansbury v. California,511 U.S. 318
, 322 (1994). The state court’s decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, nor was it based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.28 U.S.C. § 2254
(d); cf. Berkemer v. McCarty,468 U.S. 420
, 442 (1984); United States v. Woods,720 F.2d 1022
, 1029-30 (9th Cir. 1983). Therefore, the district court properly denied relief. AFFIRMED. 2