his own statements that he was “over medicated and not in good shape at the time of plea” as proof that the plea was made involuntarily or unknowingly. This Court, however, has held that conclusory statements made by a defendant are, “absent any other evidence, insufficient to show that his plea was involuntary.” United States v. Kramer, 168 F.3d 1196, 1200 (10th Cir. 1999); see also United States v. Groll, 992 F.2d 755, 758, n. 2 (7th Cir.1993). Indeed, in another case in which the defendant disclosed his use of prescription drugs at the plea hearing but later claimed he had been unable to understand “in depth” what was going on, this Court rejected the defendant’s arguments on the basis that he failed to support them with anything besides his own statements. Kramer, 168 F.3d at 1200 (<HOLDING>). As such, there is no indication that Mr.
holding that statements in medical records given for the primary purpose of medical diagnosis and treatment are nontestimonial recognizing it is common and reasonable for doctors to examine medical records and arrive at professional opinions holding that every citizen has a constitutional right of privacy in his or her medical records holding that the defendant failed to support his statements with actual evidence such as medical records or narcotic drug prescriptions or doctors affidavits holding that federal rule of evidence 8034 the hearsay exception for statements made for medical diagnosis or treatment does not apply to statements made by doctors