Also known as: FRCP 32 · Fed. R. Civ. P. 32 · Fed. R. Crim. P. 32
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A procedural rule that permits a party to use all or part of a deposition at a hearing or trial against another party only if the party was present or represented at the deposition or had reasonable notice of it, the testimony would be admissible under the evidence rules if the deponent testified live, and the use falls within specified categories.
A procedural rule that permits a party to use all or part of a deposition at a hearing or trial against another party only if the party was present or represented at the deposition or had reasonable notice of it, the testimony would be admissible under the evidence rules if the deponent testified live, and the use falls within specified categories.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A procedural rule that governs sentencing proceedings by requiring preparation of a presentence report, affording the defendant an opportunity to comment on it, and directing the court to resolve disputed factual matters before imposing sentence.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A procedural rule that governs sentencing proceedings by requiring preparation of a presentence report, affording the defendant an opportunity to comment on it, and directing the court to resolve disputed factual matters before imposing sentence.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Roberto Reyes designated a deposition transcript for use at trial only twenty days before the scheduled date. Rebecca Ross promptly served and filed a list objecting to its use under Rule 32(a) on the ground that the designation came too late for her to prepare cross-examination strategy. The court sustained the objection because the timing violated the fourteen-day window for raising such challenges.
The party against whom the deposition is offered must have been present or represented at the taking of the deposition or had reasonable notice of it. The testimony must also be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence if the deponent were present and testifying. Finally, the use must fall within one of the categories listed in Rule 32(a)(2) through (8).
Supporting sources
No. Even when a deposition satisfies the procedural prerequisites for use at trial, the testimony remains subject to all objections that could be raised if the deponent testified live, including hearsay, lack of personal knowledge, and improper character evidence.
Supporting sources
After Rajesh Rao's conviction, the probation officer prepared a presentence report detailing his criminal history and financial circumstances. Rao's counsel submitted written objections to several factual assertions in the report. The sentencing judge reviewed the objections, made findings on the disputed points, and then imposed sentence.
Rosalind Reed faced a capital sentencing hearing. The court considered a presentence report containing background information about her childhood and prior employment. Reed's counsel was given an opportunity to introduce testimony challenging portions of the report before the jury deliberated on the sentence.
Rita Russell's presentence report recommended a within-Guidelines sentence. Her attorney argued at the sentencing hearing that the case fell outside the heartland because of her minimal role and family circumstances. The judge considered the arguments, applied the section 3553(a) factors, and explained the chosen sentence on the record.
Raphael Rivera objected to the drug-quantity calculation in his presentence report. The court held a sentencing hearing, took testimony from a cooperating witness, made a specific finding on the disputed quantity, and then determined the applicable offense level before imposing sentence.
Ridgeway Partners' former executive faced sentencing after pleading guilty. The court informed him that he could decline to answer questions that might expose him to additional criminal liability. The executive invoked the privilege and the court proceeded to sentence without drawing any adverse inference from the silence.
Rule 32 requires preparation of a presentence report and gives the defendant an opportunity to comment on it. The court must resolve any disputed factual allegations in the report before relying on them to determine the sentence.
Supporting sources
Yes. Rule 32 permits the sentencing judge to consider a wide range of information about the defendant's background and character, including information contained in a presentence report prepared by a probation officer.
Supporting sources
…that a presentence report containing information about a defendant's background be prepared for use by the sentencing judge. Rule 32 (c). The importance of obtaining accurate sentencing information is underscored by the Rule's direction to the sentencing court to "afford the defendant or his counsel an opportunity to…