United States v. Marlon Moore

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Marlon Moore appeals from his conviction and sentence for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the conviction and sentence.

Moore argues that the search of his residence was unlawful because his fian-cée’s consent was coerced. Whether consent is obtained through coercion depends on the totality of the circumstances and is a question of fact that we review for clear error. United States v. Enslin, 327 F.3d 788, 792 (9th Cir.2003). The district court concluded that, although Moore’s fiancée surely consented in part to ensure the welfare of her children, her consent was not the result of any forceful, intimidating,- or threatening activity by the officers and was ultimately freely given. Under the totality of the circumstances of this case, that factual finding was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Patayan Soriano, 361 F.3d 494, 502-03 (9th Cir.2004).

Moore also argues that the district court erred in overruling his objection under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), to the government’s use of a peremptory strike…