State v. Straub

Admissions of probation violations, unlike guilty pleas, do not automatically trigger sentencing; therefore, a colloquy to ensure a knowing and intelligent waiver in the context of a probation revocation hearing is not required. United States v. Segal, 549 F2d 1293 (9th Cir. 1977).

Defendant appealed an order revoking probation. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of a proper colloquy in the context of a probation revocation hearing. On appeal, Defendant argued that due process requires a formal colloquy to contest the allegations and rights he is giving up in admitting the allegations in order for a waiver of a probation violation hearing to be knowingly and intelligently made. Admissions of probation violations, unlike guilty pleas, do not automatically trigger sentencing; therefore, a colloquy to ensure a knowing and intelligent waiver in the context of a probation revocation hearing is not required. United States v. Segal, 549 F2d 1293 (9th Cir. 1977). The Court reasoned that Defendant’s reliance on federal due process and although, here, the Ninth Circuit is not binding, its reasoning is persuasive. The error was not plain and no colloquy was required. Affirmed.