Puckett v. United States
- Decided
- March 25, 2009
- Docket
- 07-9712
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 5,608 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that plain error requires reversal if it âseriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedingsâ (emphasis added) (internal quotation marks omitted) — Stackhouse v. People (2015)
- holding that plain error requires reversal if it “seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings” (emphasis added) (internal quotation marks omitted) — Stackhouse v. People (2015)
- holding that plain-error review applies to a claim that the government breached a plea agreement when the defendant failed to object in the district court — Mendoza-Lobos v. State (2009)
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
[*131] Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question presented by this case is whether a forfeited claim that the Government has violated the terms of a plea agreement is subject to the plain-error standard of review set forth in Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009)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.