Robertson

MEMORANDUM **

Gregory Allen Robertson (“Robertson”) appeals the district court’s revocation of his supervised release and his sentence of eighteen months active time in lieu of violating his supervised release. Robertson claims that the district court erred in admitting unreliable hearsay evidence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S .C. § 1291, and we affirm.

*561 Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we do not recount it here except as necessary to explain our disposition. Robertson did not object to the admission of the hearsay testimony at the revocation hearing. Therefore, this court reviews his argument for plain error. See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). To show plain error, the appellant must meet four elements: “(1) ‘error’; (2) that is ‘plain’; and (3) that ‘affect[s] substantial rights.’ ” Johnson, 520 U.S. 461, 467 , 117 S.Ct. 1544 , 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997) (quoting Olano, 507 U.S. at 732 ). The fourth element requires that the error “seriously affect[ ] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. While Robertson has demonstrated…