United States v. Ruby

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Rule 32.1's confrontation right does not apply to the sentencing phase of revocation proceedings
• explaining that an issue “not contemporaneously raised” with the district court is “subject to plain error review”
• describing potential “concerns” with the police report at issue, including the police officer’s accuracy in recording information provided to him
• “Corroborating evidence is often key to determining whether a statement is sufficiently reliable.”
• “Corroborating evidence is often key to determining whether a statement is sufficiently reliable.”
• “[H]earsay statements may be considered at sentencing if they bear some minimal indicia of reliability.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).