Is Irion's motion to suppress evidence obtained through a warrantless search successful?

Irion first contends that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence obtained through the warrantless search and in holding that he consented to the search of his motel room. Relying upon the holding of this court in Bustamonte v. Schneckloth, 448 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1971) and related cases² he argued primarily that "where, as here, there is no evidence that the appellant knew, or was informed by the officer, that he had a right to withhold permission for the search of the dwelling, effective consent cannot be found."