United States v. Frederick Renoir Coffey

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that allocution was not required in resentencing following revocation of the defendant’s probation, and adopting the approach set forth in United States v. Core, 532 F.2d 40, 42 (7th Cir. 1976
• holding allocution not required prior to resentencing defendant for probation revocation because no right to due process exists
• holding allocution not required prior to resentencing defendant for probation revocation because no right to due process exists
• holding that the Constitution does not require allocution
• holding allocution is not required before resentencing after probation revocation, where defendant was originally sentenced to custody to be followed by probation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).