United States v. Pence

── United States v. Pence ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: April 10, 2026 Category: General 24-1025-cr United States v. Pence UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2025 (Argued: October 29, 2025 Decided: April 10, 2026) Docket No. 24-1025-cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER PENCE, Defendant-Appellant. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Before: CABRANES, CHIN, and ROBINSON, Circuit Judges. Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Hurd, J.), convicting defendant-appellant of use of a facility of interstate commerce in connection with murder-for-hire. After an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied defendant-appellant's motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement before being given Miranda warnings. The district court held that the Government established by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant-appellant was not in custody when he confessed to taking part in a murder-for-hire scheme. We agree, and affirm the judgment of the district court. AFFIRMED. MICHAEL F. PERRY, Assistant United States Attorney, for John A. Sarcone III, Acting United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Syracuse, NY, for Appellee. SUSAN C. WOLFE, Law Office of Susan C. Wolfe, Riverdale, NY, for Defendant-Appellant. CHIN, Circuit Judge: In this case, defendant-appellant Christopher Pence appeals from his conviction for use of a facility of interstate commerce in connection with murder- for-hire. Pence contends that the district court (Hurd, J.) erred by denying his motion to suppress statements he made while being interrogated by law- enforcement agents before receiving Miranda warnings. The district court held that a reasonable person in Pence's circumstances would not have believed he -2- was in custody. For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM the district court's decision. BACKGROUND I. The Facts The facts, which are largely undisputed, are drawn from the district court's findings of fact and evidence and materials in the record, including the presentence report. On appeal, Pence does not argue that the district court erred in its factual findings. A. Events Leading to the Search Warrant In 2018 Pence and his wife (the "Pences"), the parents of eleven children, began caring for five children of Francesco and Christina Cordero (the "Corderos"). The Pences lived in Washington state at the time and the Corderos in Massachusetts. In December 2019, the Pences adopted the five children, and the two families had an ongoing relationship so that the Corderos could see their children from time to time. Both families relocated to Texas, but eventually the Pences relocated to Utah and the Corderos to Hoosick Falls, New York. Thereafter, the Pences began limiting contact with the Corderos as their relationship deteriorated. At some point, the Corderos asked the children if they -3- wanted to return to live with them. The children reported the conversations to the Pences, who were upset that the Corderos were trying to get their children back. In July 2021, Pence accessed the dark web and began communicating with a purp