United States v. Constancio Leonard Barquero

57 F.3d 1078 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Constancio Leonard BARQUERO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-30456. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. June 8, 1995. Before BROWNING, REAVLEY * and NORRIS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Barquero challenges the modification of his supervised release conditions and the sentence imposed following the subsequent revocation of his supervised release. We AFFIRM. 3 * Barquero's primary claim is that he was entitled to consult with counsel before waiving his Rule 32.1(b) right to a hearing with the assistance of counsel. 4 Barquero first argues that he was entitled to counsel under the Sixth Amendment, because a proceeding to modify conditions of supervised release is a critical stage. The Sixth Amendment does not, however, apply to a modification proceeding. See Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973). Accordingly, Barquero's reliance on Faretta v.…