Deeks
United States v. Deeks
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Donald Wesley Deeks pled guilty to the importation of cocaine. On appeal he challenges the denial of his motion to suppress and contends that the district court committed procedural error by incorrectly calculating the Sentencing Guidelines range. We affirm.
We review de novo the district court’s denial of Deeks’ motion to suppress, while the underlying factual findings are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Sears, 411 F.3d 1124, 1127 (9th Cir.2005). Our review of the district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines is de novo, while we review the court’s sentencing factual findings for clear error. United States v. Lambent, 498 F.3d 963, 966 (9th Cir.2007). Review of the application of the Guidelines to the facts is for an abuse of discretion or de novo, see United States v. Rivera, 527 F.3d 891, 908 (9th Cir.2008); however, the result here is the same under either standard.
*509 We affirm the denial of the motion to suppress. The district court’s finding that Deeks’ consent to the search of his living room was voluntary is not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Todhunter, 297 F.3d 886, 891 (9th Cir.2002).