Opinion ID: 677684
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Inferred Consent to Entry

Text: 7 Defendants contend that White did not consent to the officers' entry. [T]he search of property, without warrant and without probable cause, but with proper consent voluntarily given, is valid under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164, 165-66 (1974). 8 White's actions were sufficient to give rise to an inference of implied consent. Like the defendant in United States v. Garcia, 997 F.2d 1273, 1281 (9th Cir.1993), White responded affirmatively to the officers' request to talk and then opened the door wider while stepping back. Absent any evidence indicating that White expressly or implicitly objected to the officers' entry, it is reasonable to infer from White's conduct, coupled with the officers' request to speak with him, that he implicitly consented to entry. 9 With regard to the search of defendants' luggage, the district court credited the testimony of Deputies McVicker and Nelson that defendants gave their consent to the officers' search. We again accept the district court's credibility determinations and factual findings dependent thereon.