Legal Opinion
United States v. Torres-Palma
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided May 16, 2002No. 01-2179PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHN C. PORFILIO, Circuit Judge.
This case presents the question of whether the use of video conferencing at sentencing violates the provision of Fed. R.Crim.P. 43, which requires a defendant to be “present” at the imposition of sentence. While certain exceptions to that mandate are granted in Rule 43(b), none of them explicitly permits the use of video conferencing. Although convinced of the need for and the benefits of technology to facilitate expeditious disposition of the ever-growing caseloads in federal courts, we find ourselves unable to reach any conclusion other than the word,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. Mojica BaezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Salvador Vargas Navarro Samuel Pasqual EdmondsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
- David Valenzuela-Gonzalez v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona, United States of America, Real Party in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Desmond Charles LawrenceCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2001
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- United States v. Leon BurkeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. JarviCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. LindseyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- United States v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.