United States v. Wandy Reynoso

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[t]he dispositive question is whether Reynoso has shown that the error ‘affected the outcome of the district court proceedings’”
• stating that \[t]he dispositive question is whether Reynoso has shown that the error ‘affected the outcome of the district court proceedings’ \
• distinguishing the burden of proof under harmless error review from the burden of proof under plain error review
• trial court’s violation of the Rule 32 notice requirement did not affect defendant’s substantial rights, so as to merit plain error relief
• failure to comply with Burns did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights because, had proper notice been given, there was nothing that defense counsel would have done differently at the sentencing hearing
• “[B]efore a sentencing court may rely on testimonial or other evidence from another proceeding, the court must notify the defendant and the Government of its intent to do so and must identify with particularity the evidence upon which it expects to rely and for what purpose.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).