United States v. Jared Atchley
680 F. App'x 619
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Jared Atchley was convicted under 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) for possession of an altered (shortened) rifle.
- Police interviewed Atchley and his father outside a bar; the interview lasted about 15 minutes and was not recorded.
- Atchley and his father admitted Atchley owned the rifle; Atchley described the rifle and acknowledged it had been cut short.
- Officers testified Atchley was read his Miranda rights, spoke voluntarily, and was not intoxicated; Atchley disputed voluntariness, alleging possible intoxication.
- The government relied on admissions, Atchley’s descriptions, and officer testimony to prove constructive possession and voluntariness.
- The district court admitted the statements and convicted Atchley; he appealed the admission of statements and the sufficiency of evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to record interview violated Montana law and required suppression | Atchley: Montana law required recording of interview and failure mandates suppression | Government: Recording requirement applies only in "place of detention," not to roadside/outside-bar interview | Court: No violation — interview not in a place of detention, so recording not required |
| Whether Atchley’s statements were voluntary | Atchley: Statements involuntary (possible intoxication, implied coercion) | Government: Statements voluntary — Miranda given, short nonthreatening encounter, officer testimony denies intoxication | Court: Statements voluntary by preponderance of evidence; admissible |
| Sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession of altered rifle | Atchley: Government failed to prove he knowingly possessed the shortened rifle | Government: Admissions by Atchley and father, Atchley’s detailed description, officer testimony that others lacked access show constructive possession | Court: Evidence sufficient for a rational juror to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Atchley knowingly possessed the altered rifle |
| Standard of review for evidentiary sufficiency | Atchley: challenges application of standard | Government: Evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdict; use Nevils en banc standard | Court: Applied standard and affirmed conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Grey, 907 P.2d 951 (Mont. 1995) (recording requirement implicated in custodial station-house interrogations)
- Brown v. Horell, 644 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2011) (factors for evaluating voluntariness of statements)
- United States v. Bautista, 362 F.3d 584 (9th Cir. 2004) (government must prove voluntariness by preponderance)
- United States v. Nungaray, 697 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2012) (constructive possession principles)
- United States v. Nevils, 598 F.3d 1158 (9th Cir. 2010) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)