Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

7. Plain Error

SCOTUS to clarify plain error review standard

Rosales-Mireles v. United States, USSC No. 16-9493, cert granted 9/28/17 Question presented: In United States v. Olano, this Court held that, under the fourth prong of plain error review, “[t]he Court of Appeals should correct a plain forfeited error affecting substantial rights if the error ‘seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. John A. Augoki, 2016AP231-CR, 4/25/17, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Augoki raises two claims on appeal of his jury-trial conviction of three sexual assaults: that the jury heard other-acts evidence it should hot have heard (raised here as plain error) and that the court unconstitutionally limited his cross-examination of a… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Frank M. Zdzieblowski, 2014 WI App 130; case activity The prosecutor during voir dire elicited a promise from prospective jurors that they would convict if the State proved the elements of the charged crimes beyond a reasonable doubt, and then reminded the jurors of that promise in his rebuttal closing argument. The court of… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Brian A. Patterson, Appeal No. 2013AP749-CR, District 1, 7/22/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity The State charged Patterson with 1st-degree intentional homicide in a shooting death, but the jury convicted him of a lesser-included offense: 1st degree reckless homicide.  In a cut-and-dried decision, the court of appeals held the evidence sufficient to support the conviction… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Brian L. Jackson, 2012AP1008-CR, District 1, 5/14/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity Sufficiency of the evidence In a necessarily fact-specific discussion (¶¶4-5, 10-12), the court of appeals holds there was sufficient evidence to support Jackson’s conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm despite the existence… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Henderson v. United States, USSC No. 11-9307, reversing 646 F.3d 223 (5th Cir. 2011) When is plain really plain? That’s the plain and simple issue in this case.  During trial, the district court decided a substantive legal question against the defendant.  But while the case was on direct appeal, SCOTUS, in a separate case, settled… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Question Presented Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure permits an appellate court to correct a trial court’s “plain error” despite the lack of an objection in the trial court. In Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461 (1997), this Court held that, when the governing law on an issue is settled against… Read More

{ 0 comments }

U.S. v. Marcus, USSC No. 08-1341, 5/24/10 … (A)n appellate court may,in its discretion, correct an error not raised at trial only where the appellant demonstrates that (1) there is an “error”; (2) the error is “clear or obvious, rather than subject to reasonable dispute”; (3) the error “affected the appellant’s substantial rights, which in… Read More

{ 0 comments }