Gibbs

MEMORANDUM *

Homer Earl Gibbs appeals the determination that he violated a term of supervised release and also appeals his sentence arising out of that violation. We reverse and remand.

Gibbs asserts that his admission to violation of a term of supervised release was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary. We agree. Gibbs, among other things, had the constitutional right “to present witnesses and documentary evidence” and, generally, the constitutional right “to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses.” Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 489 , 92 S.Ct. 2593, 2604 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972); see also Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778, 782 , 93 S.Ct. 1756, 1759-60 , 36 L.Ed.2d 656 (1973); United States v. Stocks, 104 F.3d 308, 310-12 (9th Cir.1997). The same is required by rule. See Fed. R.Crim.P. 32.1(b)(2). No doubt, those constitutional rights can be waived so long as the waiver is knowing, intelligent and voluntary. Stocks, 104 F.3d at 312 . In determining that, we look to the totality of circumstances as shown by the record. See id.

However, there is nothing in this record to indicate that Gibbs knew about his *640 rights, 1 much less that he made a voluntary and…