In the context of the Fourth Amendment, this Court has characterized the voluntariness of consent to a search as "a question of fact to be determined from the totality of all the circumstances." Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 227 (1973). Consistent with that, almost every federal court of appeals reviews voluntary consent findings under a deferential clear-error standard. Only the Eleventh Circuit applies a different standard, reviewing voluntariness determinations de novo, at least where the circumstances surrounding the consent are uncontested. It applied that same standard in this case, identifying no clear error yet reversing a district court's factual finding that Mr. Burwell did not consent voluntarily. The question presented is:

Whether an appellate court should review de novo or for clear error a district court's finding that a defendant did not voluntarily consent to a search.

Whether an appellate court should review de novo or for clear error a district court's finding that a defendant did not voluntarily consent to a search