United States v. Hasan
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115745
| E.D. Va. | 2010Background
- Maritime piracy defendants captured aboard a seagoing vessel off Somalia and later interrogated by U.S. personnel aboard the USS Nicholas.
- Superseding Indictment added fourteen counts including piracy, attacks with weapons, conspiracy, and 924(c) offenses; initial six-count indictment preceded the Superseding Indictment.
- April 2 satellite-phone interviews with one defendant via Somali translator occurred; Miranda warnings deemed inadequate for that interview with at least one defendant.
- April 4 in-person interviews on the USS Nicholas involved Miranda warnings and a written “cleansing statement”; multiple witnesses testified about warnings and waiver.
- Court granted in part and denied in part suppression motions; Gurewardher’s April 2 statements suppressed; April 4 statements upheld; other motions resolved on various grounds.
- Ali and Hasan’s various motions addressed juvenile status, discovery, extraterritoriality of several statutes, Rule 48(b)/Speedy Trial Act, change of venue, Bruton issues, spoliation, and multiplicity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gurewardher’s April 2 statements violated Miranda. | Government argues custodial interview; Miranda warnings given inadequately but totality supports waiver. | Gurewardher was not adequately warned; custodial interrogation occurred; coerced/undue influence potential. | Gurewardher’s April 2 statements suppressed; April 4 warnings later upheld. |
| Whether April 4 in-person interviews complied with Miranda and waiver requirements. | WA warnings given; cleansing statement and interpreter ensured understanding; waiver valid. | Defendants may not have understood rights; potential ineffective waiver. | Waiver found valid; April 4 statements admissible. |
| Whether Hasan qualifies as an adult under the Juvenile Delinquency Act. | Hasan privately claimed age consistent with adulthood; prima facie evidence supports adult status. | Hasan testified he is 18; credibility questioned; lack of corroboration. | Hasan denied juvenile status; motion to dismiss denied. |
| Whether Counts Nine, Ten, Eleven (924(c)) and Counts Seven, Eight (111) have extraterritorial application. | Ancillary statutes extend to high seas when underlying offenses have extraterritorial reach. | Statutes lack explicit extraterritorial language; policy arguments against exterior reach. | Counts Nine–Twelve and Seven–Eight held extraterritorial; denials of dismissal. |
| Whether the Superseding Indictment complies with Speedy Trial Act and Rule 48(b) in adding new charges. | Superseding indictment timely and proper; complexity warranted new charges. | Delay prejudicial; last-minute addition of counts. | Rule 48(b) and Speedy Trial Act concerns rejected; superseding indictment allowed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (establishes mandatory warning before custodial interrogation)
- Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428 (2000) (Miranda rule reaffirmed; cannot be legislatively superseded)
- Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (2010) (implicit waiver if defendant understands rights and speaks)
- United States v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (1986) (coercion must be present for involuntariness inquiry)
- Lighty v. United States, 616 F.3d 321 (4th Cir. 2010) (redaction of co-defendant statements may be permissible under Bruton/Confrontation Clause)