United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Harold J. Krause, Defendant-appellant, 983 F.2d 1078 (9th Cir. 1992)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Appellant Harold Krause appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. section 841(a) (1). Krause claims that because the search was conducted without his consent, the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence uncovered in a search of his suitcase

We reject the appellant's claims and affirm the judgment of conviction.

DISCUSSION

Appellant Krause contends that the district court erred in finding that he had consented to the search of his suitcase. We review for clear error the district court's finding. United States v. Kelley, 953 F.2d 562, 566 (9th Cir. 1992).

The district court's determination that Krause had consented to the search was based on its assessment, in the light of the circumstances of the search, of the credibility of Krause and the arresting officer, who testified that Krause had given permission for the search. When resolution of a dispute depends upon a decision about the credibility of witnesses, each of whom has offered a coherent and facially plausible story that is not contradicted by extrinsic evidence, the trier of fact's findings regarding credibility, unless internally inconsistent, are entitled to substantial deference from the reviewing court. Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985). Applying this "appropriately deferential" standard, we hold that the district court's finding that Krause had consented was not clearly erroneous. Id.

AFFIRMED.