United States v. Coenen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that some conditions of supervised release related to sex-offender notification may require pre-sentencing notice under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32
• noting that because the special condition at issue in the case was not contemplated by the Guidelines, pre- hearing notice was more important to guarantee Rule 32’s purpose of promoting focused sentencing proceedings
• determining, for non-upward departure sentencing imposition, whether defendant sufficiently objected to lack of notice before addressing whether notice required
• district court did not abuse its discretion by requiring the defendant to notify local law 15 enforcement of his name, address and the crime for which he was convicted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).