Opinion ID: 1439456
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Motion to Allocute

Text: Honken contends the district court erred by denying his motion to give a statement to the jury without being cross examined. We have previously explained defendants have neither a constitutional nor a statutory right to allocution before a jury. See United States v. Purkey, 428 F.3d 738, 761 (8th Cir.2005) (citations omitted). [Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure] 32(i)(4)(A)(ii) requires that `[b]efore imposing sentence,' the district court must `permit the defendant to speak or present any information to mitigate the sentence.' Id. We acknowledged in Purkey [the defendant]'s allocution could not have mitigated his sentence because it followed the jury's recommendation of the death penalty. Id. Nevertheless, Rule 32 does not grant [defendants] a right to allocution before a jury; Rule 32 speaks only of the court.' Id. The district court did not err by denying Honken's motion to allocute before the jury. [22]