United States v. Olano
- Decided
- April 26, 1993
- Docket
- 91-1306
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 16,571 timesSuperseded by statute (not yet verified)Possible negative treatment: superseded by statute (not yet verified) · United States v. Nathan Manuelito
What later courts said
- holding that risk of prejudice from improper presence of alternate jurors during jury deliberations was insufficient “to justify a presumption of prejudice” — United States v. Anthony Gerald White, Sr. (2005)
- holding that in criminal cases plain error review extends to forfeited but not intentionally waived errors under the plain-error doctrine — United States v. $242,484.00 (2004)
- concluding that "[t]his Court has never imposed a static analysis for the lower court to apply in all post-examination competency hearings...." — Valdez v. State (1995)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*727] Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question in this case is whether the presence of alternate jurors during jury deliberations was a “plain error” that the Court of Appeals was authorized to correct under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b).
I
Cite this
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993)Read the full opinion
Free account needed
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.