United States v. Bryant

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50099
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RODERICK DESHON BRYANT,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. MO-98-CR-126-2
--------------------
October 23, 2000
Before DAVIS, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Roderick Deshon Bryant appeals the district court’s denial
of his motions to suppress. Bryant first argues that the
district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the search
of his Holiday Inn suite. He contends both that Jeffrey Valrey
did not voluntarily consent to a search of the suite and that
Valrey lacked authority over the suite. The district court’s
holding that Valrey voluntarily consented to a search of the
suite was based on a credibility finding that we will not second-
guess. See United States v. Garza, 118 F.3d 278, 283 (5th Cir.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-50099
-2-
1997). Further, the district court did not err in holding that
Valrey had either actual or apparent authority over the suite.
See United States v. Gonzales, 121 F.3d 928, 938 (5th Cir. 1997),
cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 726, 1084 (1998); United States v.
Richard, 994 F.2d 244, 250 (5th Cir. 1993).
Bryant also contends that the district court erred in
denying his motion to suppress his statement, as it was the fruit
of his illegal arrest. Because he is raising this argument for
the first time on appeal, we decline to consider it. See
Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.
1999), cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 982 (2000). Because Bryant has
failed to demonstrate error on the part of the district court,
the denial of his motions to suppress is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --