United States v. Thomas, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25571

Thomas killed Starlin with a gun after being taunted by her following a vandalism incident at Mackey's residence.
Thomas retrieved the gun earlier that night and disclosed this to others; he later confessed after being read Miranda rights at the police station.
Thomas was briefly questioned at his mother's home in a non-custodial setting before being arrested and read Miranda warnings at the station.
The district court denied suppression of the statements, ruling non-custodial setting and proper Miranda waiver.
The jury heard testimony about Thomas's mental state, accompaniments, and prior confessions; Thomas was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life.
Thomas challenged suppression, judgment of acquittal, and mistrial on prosecutorial misconduct grounds; the court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the initial home questioning custodial?	Thomas argues statements were custodial and inadmissible.	Thomas contends non-custodial setting; Miranda not required until custody.	Statements were non-custodial; Miranda warnings not required at the home.
Are the post-Miranda statements admissible as non-fruit of the unwarned questioning?	Post-Miranda statements were tainted by unwarned primary questioning.	Elstad allows voluntary waiver and admissibility if voluntary and proper Miranda warnings were given.	Post-Miranda statements properly admitted; no Seibert violation since interrogation aimed at probable cause and not a two-step tactic.
Was the sufficiency of evidence adequate for premeditated first-degree murder?	Evidence does not establish premeditation beyond reasonable doubt.	Evidence of planning/deliberation supports premeditation.	Sufficient evidence supported premeditation; verdict affirmed.
Did prosecutorial misconduct warrant a mistrial?	Questionable conduct and closing remark undermined fair trial.	Any misconduct was cured by objections and curative instructions; trial otherwise fair.	No abuse of discretion; mistrial not warranted; conduct did not deprive fair trial.

J.D.B. v. North Carolina, 131 S. Ct. 2394 (2011) (custody determination is objective and factors govern Miranda applicability)
United States v. Griffin, 922 F.2d 1343 (8th Cir. 1990) (Griffin factors assess custodial interrogation)
Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004) (two-step interrogation only improper when used to circumvent Miranda)
Torres-Lona, 491 F.3d 750 (8th Cir. 2007) (adoption of Seibert framework in the circuit)
Elstad, 470 U.S. 298 (1985) (unwarned but non-coercive statement does not bar later voluntary confession)
Chavez v. Weber, 497 F.3d 796 (8th Cir. 2007) (harmless error when overwhelming independent guilt evidence exists)
Griffin, 922 F.2d 1343 (8th Cir. 1990) (non-exhaustive factors in custody analysis)
United States v. Wise, 588 F.3d 531 (8th Cir. 2009) (de novo review of Fifth Amendment suppression legal conclusions)
United States v. Binion, 570 F.3d 1034 (8th Cir. 2009) (factual findings reviewed for clear error)
United States v. Czichray, 378 F.3d 822 (8th Cir. 2004) (credibility and custody determinations afforded deference)
United States v. Eagle, 515 F.3d 794 (8th Cir. 2008) (considering cumulative misconduct with other factors)