United States v. Martinez

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-10528
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN MARTINEZ, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:00-CR-14-1
--------------------
December 13, 2000
Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Martinez, Jr., appeals the district court’s revocation
of his supervised release. He asserts that the district court
should have required the Government to present independent
evidence against him and that the court should have provided
reasons for its judgment. These are rights which were waived by
Martinez’s plea of true to the charges against him. See
Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 489 (1972); United States v.
Holland, 850 F.2d 1048, 1050-51 (5th Cir. 1988); United States v.
Ayers, 946 F.2d 1127, 1129-30 (5th Cir. 1991). Martinez also

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-10528
-2-
contends that the district court should have ascertained on the
record that his plea was knowing and voluntary as is required
under Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). Because Martinez
did not object to the district court’s failure to do so at the
revocation hearing, review is for plain error. United States v.
Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc).
Martinez has failed to show plain error arising out of the
district court’s failure to provide him the protections of Boykin
at his supervised-release-revocation hearing. Consequently, the
district court’s decision is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --