Document: 539 U.S. 69 NGUYENv.UNITED STATES. No. 01-10873. Supreme Court of United States. Argued March 24, 2003. Decided June 9, 2003.* Petitioners were tried, convicted, and sentenced on federal narcotics charges in the District Guam, a territorial court with subject-matter jurisdiction over both federal-law local-law causes. The Ninth Circuit panel convened to hear their appeals included two judges from that court, whom are life-tenured Article III judges, Chief Judge for Northern Mariana Islands, an IV territorial-court judge appointed by President confirmed Senate 10-year term. Neither petitioner objected panel's composition before cases submitted decision, neither sought rehearing challenge authority decide after it affirmed convictions. However, each filed certiorari petition claiming judgment is invalid because non-Article participated panel. Held: did not have petitioners' appeals. Pp. 74-83. (a) In light relevant statutory provisions historical usage, evident Congress contemplate Islands be "district judges" within meaning 28 U. S. C. § 292(a), which authorizes assignment "one or more district [a] circuit" sit "whenever business so requires." As used throughout Title 28, court" means "`court States'" "constituted chapter 5 this title." 451. Among other things, Chapter creates "United States Court" judicial district, 132(a), exhaustively enumerates districts constituted, 133(a), describes as holding office "during good behavior," 134(a). Significantly, one enumerated courts, nor even mentioned 5. See 133(a). Because court's term years may removed cause, they also do satisfy 134(a)'s command hold during behavior. Although literally judge" "within [Ninth] [C]ircuit," such reading 292(a) capacious would justify designation any number state courts "within" Circuit. Moreover, historically, has ordinarily excluded when similar Court. E. g., Mookini v. States, 303 201, 205. 74-76. (b) Government's three grounds leaving judgments below undisturbed persuasive. First, Court's precedents concerning alleged irregularities compel application here de facto officer doctrine, confers validity upon acts performed person acting under color official title though later discovered legality person's appointment deficient, Ryder 515 177, 180. Typically, found judge's actions valid there "merely technical" defect authority, McDowell 159 596, 601-602, but when, here, been violation provision embodies weighty congressional policy proper organization see, e. American Constr. Co. Jacksonville, T. & K. W. R. Co., 148 372, 387. Second, essentially same reasons, inappropriate accept invitation assess merits convictions whether fairness, integrity, public reputation proceedings impaired Third, argument presence quorum otherwise-qualified sufficient support decision rejected reasons. statute, 46(d), books (in part unchanged) century, yet never doubted its power vacate entered improperly constituted appeals, was competent consider appeal. See, American-Foreign Corp., 363 685. statute authorizing panels, 46(b), requires inclusion at least first instance. who took had original properly created, highly doubtful serve themselves Thus, appropriate return these fresh consideration 77-83. 284 F. 3d 1086, vacated remanded. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion Court, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, JJ., joined. REHNQUIST, dissenting opinion, SCALIA, GINSBURG, BREYER, joined, post, p. 83. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR NINTH CIRCUIT Jeffrey Green argued cause petitioners. With him briefs Howard Trapp Rawlen Mantanona, 538 920, Carter G. Phillips, Eric A. Shumsky. Patricia Millett her brief Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney Chertoff, Deputy Dreeben.† JUSTICE STEVENS 1 These present question Appeals consisting We conclude not, we therefore Appeals. 2 * residents island possession since end Spanish-American War.1 Navy administered island, except period Japanese occupation World War II, until established Guam unincorporated Territory passage Organic Act 1950.2 Pursuant Congress' IV, 3, Constitution "make all needful Rules Regulations respecting Property belonging States," created vested causes arising law local law.3 tried jury, lengthy prison terms offenses. dispute conduct criminal trial enter conviction. 3 authorized statute,4 petitioners appealed Senior Circuit, are, course, "good Behaviour" compensation diminished while office. Const., Art. III, 1. third member Islands. That substantially Guam.5 unlike judge, 10 years, "unless sooner cause."6 4 unusual occurred special sittings When heard arguments invited participate. A similarly participate sat without dissent. 1086 (2002). Nguyen Phan decision; rendered Each did, however, file raising participation accordance Rule 10(a), granted writ, 537 999 (2002), determine "so far departed accepted usual course call exercise supervisory powers." Pet. Cert. 01-10873, 6; 02-5034, For following find power. II 6 begin grant permitting, certain circumstances, part, chief circuit assign 292(a). Section itself does explicitly define assigned make perfectly clear, 7 Outside contains several particularly instructive provisions. defined mean turn district. 132(a) ("There shall record known district"). And judge[s]" members those courts. 132(b) ("Each consist regular active service"). then enumerated. 133(a) ("The appoint, advice consent Senate, districts, follows [listing districts]"). Lastly, behavior." 8 Taking together, cannot read permit 5.7 9 Government agrees best together permitting maintains, erroneous plainly impermissible expressly forbid separately court." This contention excessively strained interpretation statute. To sure, literal words isolation rest might arguably assigning service Appeals, he called [C]ircuit." But sort Circuit.8 plausibly interpreted authorize improper cases. regard "historic significance" 28. 205 (1938). "[W]ithout addition expressing wider connotation," excludes III. Ibid. Summers 231 92, 101-102 (1913) ("[T]he Territories laws them States"); Stephens Cherokee Nation, 174 445, 476-477 (1899) ("It must admitted `United Court' accurately . [to refer to] Indian Territory"). Construing further aid It necessarily deciding unauthorized.9 11 concedes advances undisturbed. Two urged affirm concern failure object Relying so-called "de officer" contends earliest practicable moment completely forecloses relief meet requirements plain-error review. invoked ground below. contentions 12 explained, "confers election deficient." 180 (1995). Whatever force doctrine examination our us apply 13 authority. Glidden Zdanok, 370 530, 535 (1962) (plurality Harlan, J.). 601-602 (1895), example, declined notice Judge's temporary another Ball 140 118, 128-129 (1891) (assigned replace deceased designated disabled judge). observed McDowell, whose questioned otherwise qualified serve, "a having powers attached office," empowered designate him. S., 601. 14 By contrast, agreed correct, direct review, violations "embodies strong administration business" raised timely manner. Glidden, 536 opinion). 372 (1893), case Justice Harlan cited proposition challenged prohibited taking hearing appeal.10 succinctly observed: "If made incompetent hearing, decree unlawful, perhaps absolutely void, should certainly set aside quashed review appeal, error certiorari." rule again applied William Cramp Sons Ship Engine Building International Curtiss Marine Turbine 228 645 (1913), parties consented permitted Id., 650. Rather than sift through underlying merits, remanded [organized] conformably statute." 651. Moran Dillingham, 153, 158 ("[T]his considering respects, orders Decree quashed, determined according bench (emphasis deleted)). 15 confronted fundamental "some effort conform formal conditions [a judge's] particular depend." Johnson Manhattan 61 2d 934, 938 (CA2 1932) (L. Hand, difference between irregular designations instant action could taken, if pursued, taken all. Like statutes Sons, Moran, courts.11 enjoy protections forth preserve character trivial concern, cf. Pipeline Marathon Pipe Line 458 50, 57-60 (1982) opinion), entitled respect. purport "all to" position 601, court. Accordingly, his contravened 16 think true, observes, limits appellate plain error. 2111; Fed. Crim. Proc. 52(b). ignore incorrectly suggest some (or inaction) create quite carefully withheld. Even stipulated no matter how distinguished well be, stipulation cured panel.12 17 More fundamentally, enforcement 292(a)'s outer bounds driven much general rule, use circumvent obligation errors prejudicial effect. Bank Nova Scotia 487 250, 254-255 (1988). involves business," inconsistent rule.13 invalidated assessing prejudice, so, 685, 690-691 (1960) (vacating en banc provided statute). 18 true three-judge constitute legally able transact business.14 settled permits proceed dies disqualified. Allied Stevedoring 241 925, 927 1957) save century,15 685 (1960); (1913); (1893). 19 instance.16 Second noted, apparently enacted 46(b) "to curtail prior practice circuits routinely two-judge panels." Murray National Broadcasting 35 45, 47 (1994). "clear intended preclude disposition event appeal becomes unable participate," ibid., less clear offers postjudgment absolution although doubt, organized "comformably statute."17 20 remand consistent opinion. 21 ordered. Notes: Together 02-5034,Phan &#x2020; Gordon Rhea Thomas Moore amicus curiae urging affirmance. Treaty Paris, 30 Stat. 1755 64 384. generally Leibowitz, Defining Status: Comprehensive Analysis Territorial Relations 313, 323 (1989) 22, 389, 48 1424."The `District Guam' rather chosen title, Federal 22 federal-question matters."Guam Olsen, 431 195, 196-197, n. (1977) (citing Rep. 2109, 81st Cong., Sess., (1950)). Legislature transfer Guam. 200-201 Agana Bay Dev. (Hong Kong) Ltd. 529 952, 959 (CA9 1976) (Kennedy, dissenting)). 1294(4) provides: "[A]ppeals reviewable decisions follows: "(4) From Circuit." "The including, limited to, diversity section 1332 bankruptcy described subsection Islands." 1822. text closely corresponding 95-475, (1977). 1821(b)(1) instead ("Territories Insular Possessions"). 1821 Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Washington judiciaries include judges." Alaska §§ 22.15.010, 22.15.020, 22.20.010 (2002); Haw. VI, 1; Rev. 604-1 (1993); Idaho V, 11; Code 1-701 (1948-1998); Mont. VII, 1, 4, Nev. 6, 5-6; 1.010 (1995); Wash. (West Supp. 2003); 3.30.015, 3.30.030, 3.34.010, 3.66.010 (1988 West 2003) contend violated structural constitutional guarantees embodied Appointments Clause, 2, cl. Constitution. unnecessary discuss questions inAmerican who, sitting order related At time, governing "no justice existing appeals." Evarts Act, ch. 517, 26 827. seeks distinguishWilliam issue cases, "expressly prohibited" participation. Brief 18. conclusion plausible see supra, 74-76, distinction difference. event, "express" prohibition play (1960), banc, so. id., 691 (Harlan, dissenting) need hardly read, now holds saying `heard determined' judges"). agree submission "an isolated, one-time mistake." Countervailing concerns gamesmanship, animate requirement contemporaneous objection, dissipate rarity undoubtedly vests only correct substantive law, prescribe method go about them."Lehman Brothers Schein, 416 386, 393 (1974) (REHNQUIST, concurring). 46(d) "A majority thereof... quorum." "quorum.. business." Tobin Ramey, 206 505, 507 (CA5 1953). Mar. 1911, 117, 36 1131: "There ." contained provision: "[T]here hereby Ch. 826. provides, pertinent part: "In determination controversies separate unless recused disqualified Unlike dissent, believe itwould "flou[t] stated will Congress," 84 (opinion J.), into serious integrity stand, CHIEF BREYER join, dissenting. 23 Under Criminal Procedure 52(b), forfeited [they were] raised" Olano, 725, 731 (1993) added). "`plain'" "`affect[s] substantial rights,'" 732, "`an discretion error... ... seriously affect[s] proceedings,'" Cotton, 625, 631-632 (2002) (quoting 520 461, 467 (1997)) ignoring well-established limitation remedial flouts almost 70 own precedent. 24 mistake, reasons ante, judge. Exercise warranted correctly. extent, I basis vacating convictions, assuming affected rights, simply affect proceedings. 25 knew week orally argued. App. 7, 9-12. They objection preferring wait decided against raise it. concedes, must, Ante, 80. ignores fact "the 52(b) circumscribed." 732. Indeed, fails cite, apply, Olano recent reaffirming "we sparingly," Jones 527 373, 389 (1999), "`in circumstances miscarriage result,'" 736 Young, 470 (1985)). baffling precedent clarity intent limit courts' explained articulated standard guide ago Atkinson, 297 157 (1936). 736. codified 7). Since then, repeatedly quoted Atkinson language describing review." cases). According long line affects error." Johnson, 469-470 736) (internal quotation marks omitted; emphasis 27 mandatory inquiry confirms "miscarriage justice" result affirmed. claim Munson biased incompetent. His abilities jurist, peculiarly experienced adjudicating matters Territories, stand unimpeached. difficult understand fairness process advanced allowing defendants, supported "`overwhelming'" evidence, 633, 634, meritless, consume resources necessary second review.* proffers justifications controlling precedents, none reliance misplaced. 79-80, 11, 81, 82. case, Medina retired months issued decision. 686-687. He nonetheless subsequently joined 687. because, "court banc" "active 46(c) omitted)). 29 speak situation forfeit Forfeiture "`the assertion right tribunal it.'" 465 731). fail. Rather, possible moment: immediately know retire briefed submitted; availed opportunity filing motion banc. Petitioner error, apply. here. learned oral failed forfeiture test faithfully. 31 relies mistakenly 78-79, 11. considered providing "`no Appeals.'" 649; held that, contravention "comprehensive inflexible" prohibition, 650, statutorily act. Construction, 32 control note, predate adoption 1936, codification 1944. This, broader principle, explains modern analysis. excuse. can easily litigation facts: "in express prohibitions statute" lack Cramp, 650 run afoul "prohibition." deduced negative implication, series describe panels Courts 75-76. 33 says withheld." affirmance suggest. conceded makes Munson's unwittingly why mistaken: imposed via "create[s]" exercises "authority [that] 34 On record, concluding No address claims. argue decline "neither below, [was] presented Blessing Freestone, 329, 340, (1997). Petitioners' claim, like one, subject "No procedural principle familiar civil it." Yakus 321 414, 444 (1944); 465. 631-633 (applying claimed Apprendi New Jersey, 530 466 (2000)); Plaut Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 211, (1995) legal defenses based doctrines central independence waived accord cases"); Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n Schor, 478 833, 848-849 (1986) ("[A]s personal right, III's guarantee impartial independent adjudication waiver, just rights dictate procedures tried"). Assuming, arguendo, elements inquiry, 732; 84-85, reason claim: shown 85. Drug agents seized 443.8 grams methamphetamine package mailed opened Nguyen's apartment. 1087-1088 2002). apartment, drug paraphernalia, "nearly hundred little plastic zip lock bags," $6,000 cashId., 1088, 1091. All challenges—that abused admitting evidence insufficient convictions—lacked merit. Goodwin, writing evidentiary challenges "overstate[d]," "clearly necessary" 1090. respect sufficiency argument, unanimous "[t]here plenty evidence," 1091, "abundant facts," 1090,

Category: 8