Legal Opinion
United States v. Vonn
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided March 4, 2002No. 00-973PublishedCited by 1,476 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Souter
The Government avoids reversal of a criminal conviction by showing that trial error, albeit raised by a timely objection, affected no substantial right of the defendant and was thus harmless. Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 52(a). A defendant who failed to object to trial error may nonetheless obtain reversal of a conviction by carrying the converse burden, showing among other things that plain error did affect his substantial rights. Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 52(b).
Rule 11(h) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure is a separate harmless-error rule applying only to errors committed under Rule 11, the…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,476 opinions
- Puckett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- United States v. Dominguez BenitezSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- United States v. Robert Schuh, Lisa Nolen, and Curtis LaneCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
- Molina-Martinez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- United States v. Larry D. KnoxCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
1,471 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.