Opinion ID: 2621923
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Obviousness

Text: ¶42 The second element a defendant must establish to prevail under plain error review is that `the error should have been obvious to the trial court.' Ross, 2007 UT 89, ¶ 17 (quoting Lee, 2006 UT 5, ¶ 26). An error is obvious when the law governing the error was clear at the time the alleged error was made. State v. Dean, 2004 UT 63, ¶ 16, 95 P.3d 276. An error may be obvious if a review of the plain language of the relevant statute reveals the error. See State v. Portillo, 914 P.2d 724, 726 (Utah Ct. App. 1996). ¶43 Under the plain language of Utah Code section 76-5-203(4)(a), extreme emotional distress manslaughter and imperfect self-defense manslaughter are affirmative defenses to murder. Because extreme emotional distress is clearly listed as an affirmative defense to murder, it was obvious error for the district court to force the affirmative defense on Low by including the extreme emotional distress manslaughter instruction over Low's objection. This satisfies the second prong of the plain error standard.