Opinion ID: 2620294
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Inspector Busch’s Testimony

Text: Goode next argues that the District Court erred in admitting Inspector Busch’s testimony. Goode asserts, for the first time on appeal, that the government did not provide notice that expert testimony would be introduced, as required under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. He also asserts, for the first time on appeal, that Inspector Busch delivered inadmissible expert testimony. Because Goode failed to object on these grounds at trial, we apply plain error review. 1 The District Court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. “This Court reviews the District Court’s denial of a motion to suppress for clear error as to the underlying factual findings and exercises plenary review of the District Court’s application of the law to those facts.” United States v. Perez, 280 F.3d 318, 336 (3d Cir. 2002). We review for plain error the District Court’s decision to admit evidence in the absence of an objection to its admissibility. See United States v. Rivas, 493 F.3d 131, 136 (3d Cir. 2007). 4 To establish plain error, a defendant must show that the “error was clear or obvious under current law” and “affected the outcome of the trial.” United States v. Rivas, 493 F.3d at 136. “If these requirements are met, we may reverse, if the error ‘seriously affect[ed] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.’” Id. (alteration in original) (citing Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 470 (1997)). Assuming, without deciding, that the District Court erred in admitting Inspector Busch’s testimony, the District Court did not commit plain error because this testimony did not affect the outcome of Goode’s trial. Given the overwhelming evidence against Goode, the outcome of his case would have been the same regardless of Inspector Busch’s testimony about typical bank fraud and identity theft schemes. Accordingly, Goode has failed to establish plain error, and his conviction shall not be disturbed.