Allen

MEMORANDUM *

Alen appeals from the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus. The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction of this timely filed appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We affirm.

We review this denial of a petition for habeas corpus de novo, but findings of fact made by the district court relevant to the denial are reviewed for clear error. Bonin v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 823 (9th Cir. 1995). We granted a certificate of appeal-ability as to two of the issues raised by Alen. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 482-83 , 120 S.Ct. 1595 , 146 L.Ed.2d 542 .

First, Alen asserts that his second trial, which was necessitated by a mistrial in the first proceeding, violated the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. We review this issue de novo. Weston v. Kernan, 50 F.3d 633, 636 (9th Cir. *577 1995). Retrial is “permitted if the defendant consented to the mistrial.” Id. Consent may be implied where “[d]efense counsel did not object to the order of mistrial, despite adequate opportunity to do so.” United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 350, 352 (9th Cir.1980). Here, the record demonstrates that there was “adequate…