United States v. Christopher Thomas, AKA Chris Reese, AKA Chris Thomas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that oral pronouncement “serves the salutary function of insuring that a defendant fully understands the contours of his punishment at a time when any questions he or his lawyer may have can be explored and resolved in person”
• underscoring that “[b]ecause the [d]istrict [c]ourt required [the defendant] to pay restitution, the Guidelines recommend the imposition of” a special condition “mirror[ing]” now-section 5D1.3(b)(3)(B)
• noting that the district court “did not set forth any conditions of the supervision during the sentencing hearing, nor did it indicate that it would incorporate the conditions listed in the PSR”
• asking the district court to “make clear during the sentencing hearing exactly which conditions of release it intends to impose”
• finding error where the district court “did not set forth any conditions of the supervision during the sentencing hearing, nor did it indicate that it would incorporate the conditions listed in the PSR”
• remanding where the district court did not set forth a special condition during the sentencing hearing, “nor . . . indicate that it would incorporate the conditions listed in the PSR” and then included the condition in the written judgment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).