Opinion ID: 71983
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Davis's ADA Claim

Text: In his brief to this court, Davis asserts for the first time that the district court violated the ADA by failing to accommodate his hearing disability. [5] As Davis did not raise this issue before the district court, our review is for plain error only. United States v. Jasso, 587 F.3d 706, 709 (5th Cir.2009). This court finds plain error when: (1) there was an error; (2) the error was clear and obvious; and (3) the error affected the defendant's substantial rights. Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Assuming arguendo that the ADA is applicable to the federal courts, [6] Davis cannot show that there was any error, let alone an error that affected his substantial rights. Davis argues that he was unable to meaningfully participate in his own trial but fails to provide any support for this argument. Davis did not make any request to the district court for any accommodations during trial. Davis fails to demonstrate how the district court's failure to give him accommodations that were never requested affected his substantial rights. Davis's ADA claim utterly fails to rise to the level of plain error.