United States v. Carron

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 10, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-40867
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JEREMY JOSEPH CARRON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:02-CR-90-2
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jeremy Joseph Carron appeals his conviction for possession
with intent to distribute crack cocaine. He argues that the
district court erred in denying him standing to assert his Fourth
Amendment rights in the home of his co-defendant, Todd Broussard;
that the district court erred in finding that Broussard
voluntarily consented to the search of his home; and that the

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-40867
-2-
district court erred in finding that the search warrant issued on
Broussard’s home was valid.
We assume arguendo, without deciding, that Carron had a
legitimate expectation of privacy in Broussard’s home and,
therefore, that he has standing to challenge the constitutionality
of the search. See United States v. Wilson, 36 F.3d 1298, 1302
(5th Cir. 1994). We hold, however, that the district court’s
factual findings that Broussard consented to the search of his
residence and, under the totality of the circumstances, that his
consent was voluntarily given were not clearly erroneous. See
United States v. Randall, 887 F.2d 1262, 1265 (5th Cir. 1989);
United States v. Zucco, 71 F.3d 188, 191 (5th Cir. 1995).
Because we find that Broussard consented to the search of
his residence, we do not address the issue of whether the search
warrant was valid.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --