United States v Craig

Craig appealed his sentence for probation violations arguing he was deprived the opportunity to speak directly to eh judge. The panel affirmed. The panel haled that plain error review applied as Craig did not object and circuit precedent does allow de novo review when there is no objection and Craig’s counsel’s belief objecting to the lack of opportunity was impolite did not make objection futile. The panel held there was no plain error as there is no binding precedent requiring district judges in the 10th Circuit to personally ask the defendant at a probation revocation sentencing hearing whether he has anything to say and in any event Craig’s attorney told the district court that Craig had no problem with the sentence to be imposed.