U.S. v. Reyes-Bosque & Ramirez-Esqueda, No. 08-50253; 08-50330 (3-1-10) (Siler joined by Schroeder and Ikuta). The 9th affirms alien smuggling convictions and denials of motions to suppress searches and statements. The case presents interesting discussions of what constitutes "standing" to challenge a search given that defendant Ramirez-Esqueda contended that he was an "overnight guest" in the unit searched. The 9th affirmed the lack of standing because the evidence was insufficient to show that he was a guest; rather, he was likely scouting locations for safe houses. The statements were found not to be in violation of Miranda, Edwards, and Seibert. The defendant Ramirez-Esqueda did not allege a deliberate two-step approach. The 9th also found that the admission of hearsay testimony was not plain error. Defendant Reyes-Bosque asked for a new lawyer at the end of the trial, but his displeasure was not from a breakdown in the relationship, but from the defendant's unhappiness with the outcome of the trial.