UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4915
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KELVIN LENARD WASHINGTON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:09-cr-00419-WO-1)
Submitted: July 12, 2013 Decided: October 15, 2013
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James E. Quander, Jr., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Robert A.J.
Lang, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kelvin Lenard Washington was sentenced to seventy
months’ imprisonment after entering a conditional guilty plea to
one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). He appeals the
district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the firearm,
contending the search in which it was discovered was conducted
without valid consent.
This Court reviews the district court’s denial of a
motion to suppress in the light most favorable to the
Government. United States v. Farrior, 535 F.3d 210, 217 (4th
Cir. 2008). We review the district court’s finding of voluntary
consent to a warrantless search for clear error. United
States v. Gordon, 895 F.2d 932, 938 (4th Cir. 1990). We also
review the district court’s credibility determinations for clear
error. United States v. Murray, 65 F.3d 1161, 1169 (4th Cir.
1995).
The Fourth Amendment generally prohibits warrantless
searches, however, an exception exists for searches conducted
pursuant to valid consent. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S.
218, 219 (1973); Trulock v. Freeh, 275 F.3d 391, 401 (4th Cir.
2001). Consent to search is valid only if it is given freely
and voluntarily. Trulock, 275 F.3d at 401. In establishing
whether consent to search was given freely and voluntarily, the
2
Government bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the
evidence, and the district court must consider the totality of
the circumstances. Id. at 401 & n.4. A
Here, the district court found that Washington’s
girlfriend voluntarily consented to a search of their residence
that revealed the prohibited firearm. The court found testimony
from the police officer who conducted the search credible, and
conflicting testimony from Washington’s girlfriend and another
friend incredible. The court considered various factors in
reaching its conclusion, such as the girlfriend’s admission that
she helped officers enter the residence, her bias resulting from
her relationship with Washington, and her level of intelligence.
On appeal, Washington contends that his girlfriend never
consented or alternatively that any consent was involuntary.
Our review of the record compels us to reject Washington’s
contentions.
We conclude that the district court did not clearly
err in finding voluntary consent to the search. Gordon, 895
F.2d at 938. The district court made reasoned credibility
determinations that are entitled to deference, Murray, 65 F.3d
at 1169, and properly considered the totality of the
circumstances in reaching its conclusion. Trulock, 275 F.3d at
401. Accordingly, we conclude without difficulty that the
3
district court’s decision to deny Washington’s suppression
motion finds ample support in the record.
We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
4