United States v. Modesto Gonzalez, III


Case: 19-50725 Document: 00515444245 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/08/2020 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 8, 2020 No. 19-50725 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Consolidated with 20-50395 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. MODESTO GONZALEZ III, also known as Tres, Defendant–Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:18-CR-64-1 Before BARKSDALE, HAYNES, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Modesto Gonzalez III appeals his convictions for wire fraud and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. Specifically, Gonzalez argues that his statements to law enforcement officers were obtained illegally and should have been suppressed. We disagree and affirm. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 19-50725 Document: 00515444245 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/08/2020 No. 19-50725 I In January 2018, state and federal agents executed a federal search warrant at Gonzalez’s home. The warrant authorized officers to seize evidence of Gonzalez’s two suspected crimes: (1) defrauding illegal aliens by falsely claiming to be a federal agent capable of providing immigration assistance in exchange for substantial payments, and (2) illegally possessing firearms and ammunition as a felon. Prior to executing the search warrant, the agents discussed their approach. They planned to knock on Gonzalez’s door and wait for a response rather than use force to enter. DEA Agent Piekenbrock, who was responsible for the impersonation investigation, told the other agents that he “was going to try to interview [Gonzalez], but that was obviously no guarantee.” Piekenbrock did not intend to provide Gonzalez with a Miranda warning before such an interview because he did not plan to arrest him that day. Around 7:10 a.m., “between eight and ten” agents arrived at Gonzalez’s home to execute the warrant. Their clothing identified them as law enforcement, but they were not wearing tactical clothing and did not have their weapons drawn. Piekenbrock, accompanied by other agents, knocked on the front door. Gonzalez answered. After a brief discussion with the agents, he stepped onto the porch. Gonzalez was “upset” and “immediately agitated.” He loudly said, “[l]et’s get going and let’s just get this over with,” that the agents were “going to get [his] family killed,” that the agents should “take [him], and . . . go,” used profanity, and appeared to be “about to start a fight.” The agents, by contrast, maintained a “[m]easured” and calm tone. The agents told Gonzalez that they came to execute a search warrant— not an arrest warrant. But Gonzalez was still agitated. Due to his “aggressive behavior,” agents handcuffed Gonzalez and temporarily seated him on a chair 2 Case: 19-50725 Document: 00515444245 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/08/2020 No. 19-50725 on the porch. Soon thereafter, agents moved Gonzalez to a chair next to the stairs leading to the front door of his home ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals