Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joaquin Alberto AYALA-OROS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-02-17
Citations: 311 F. App'x 975
Docket Number: No. 07-50433
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joaquin Alberto AYALA-OROS, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, BEA and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 311
Pages: 975–975

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joaquin Alberto AYALA-OROS, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 07-50433.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 12, 2009.
Filed Feb. 17, 2009.
John Parmley, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Keith H. Rutman, Law Offices of Keith H. Rutman, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: KLEINFELD, BEA and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Border patrol agents did not violate Ayala-Oros's Fourth Amendment rights by detaining him for a secondary inspection on account of his nervousness. See, e.g., United States v. Taylor, 934 F.2d 218, 221 (9th Cir.1991).
The district court did not clearly err by crediting the testimony of Border Patrol agents and, based on such testimony and the agents' nonthreatening behavior, concluding Ayala-Oros voluntarily consented to the search of his truck. See United States v. Preciado-Robles, 964 F.2d 882, 885 (9th Cir.1992).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.