United States v. Echegollen-Barrueta

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court’s personal address to defendant, “asking twice whether he had ‘anything to say,’” failed to satisfy Rule 32 when the defendant’s answers demonstrated that he may not have understood that he had a right to speak on any subject of his choosing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).