United States v. Ricardo Garcia-Segura

How courts have described this case

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

• encouraging courts to ask “whether [defendants] are satisfied that the court has ad- dressed their main arguments in mitigation” and if they as- sent, “a later challenge … would be considered waived”
• encouraging courts to ask “whether [defendants] are satisfied that the court has ad- dressed their main arguments in mitigation” and if they as- sent, “a later challenge … would be considered waived”
• encouraging courts to ask “whether [defendants] are satisfied that the court has ad- dressed their main arguments in mitigation” and if they as- sent, “a later challenge … would be considered waived”
• a sentencing court must address a defendant’s principal arguments in mitigation unless they are too weak to merit discussion
• “We encourage sentencing courts to inquire of defense counsel whether they are satisfied that the court has addressed their main arguments in mitigation.”
• \We encourage sentencing courts to inquire of defense counsel whether they are satisfied that the court has addressed their main arguments in mitigation.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).