Quarles, 467 U.S. at 652, 104 S.Ct. 2626. When the officer asked the defendant where the gun was, the defendant nodded in the direction of empty cartons and responded that the “gun is over there.” Id. The officer found a loaded .38-caliber revolver in the direction pointed to by the defendant. Id. In recognizing the public safety exception to Miranda, the Court held that the defendant’s statement and the gun were admissible. Id. at 659-60,104 S.Ct. 2626. Similarly, our sister circuits in interpreting Quarles have held that the public safety exception applies to inquiries made when the defendant is handcuffed. See, e.g., United States v. Lackey, 334 F.3d 1224, 1228 (10th Cir.2003); United States v. Edwards, 885 F.2d 377, 384 n. 4 (7th Cir.1989); see also Estrada, 430 F.3d at 613 (<HOLDING>). But see United States v. Brathwaite, 458 F.3d
holding that the injury was inflicted by the defendant when it occurred while the defendant applied force directly to the victims person holding public safety exception to miranda warning requirement did not apply where there was no evidence gun had been left in public place holding that evidence of the defendants connection to the guns suggests possession of the drugs found next to the guns holding that public safety exception applied when police asked while handcuffing the defendant whether any guns were present recognizing the public interest exception