192351P.pdf   12/22/2020  United States  v.  Amin Ricker
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  19-2351
   U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre   
   [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Gruender and Kobes, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. At the time he made 
   incriminating statements, defendant was not subject to the restraints 
   associated with a formal arrest and thus he was not in custody; defendant 
   did not assert his Fifth Amendment right to counsel by telling the officer 
   that his attorney was at a funeral and that his father wanted his attorney 
   present; defendant being on the autism spectrum and English being his 
   second language did not make his statements involuntary based on the 
   totality of the circumstances; no error in sequestering defendant's father 
   after the U.S. Attorney put his name on the witness list as there was a 
   colorable reason for the listing (defendant's announced intention to place 
   his mental health in issue); it was error to admit descriptive cover memos 
   regarding certain images as the memos were hearsay, but the error was 
   harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt; no 
   error in admitting expert testimony identifying defendant's hand in photos 
   of child abuse; for sentencing purposes, the question of whether defendant 
   had a prior state conviction for possessing or distributing child 
   pornography could be decided by the court without a jury; defendant's 
   600-month sentence was substantively reasonable, and the district court 
   did not abuse its discretion in weighing the sentencing factors; mandatory 
   minimum sentence was not unconstitutional in this case.