Court Opinion

ID: 9836711
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 03:14:52.892555+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:18.404928
License: Public Domain

GIERKE, Judge
(concurring in part and in the result and dissenting in part):
To the extent that the lead opinion suggests that “an unfair prejudicial impact on the jury’s deliberations” (54 MJ at 143) is an element of plain error, I disagree. Likewise, to the extent that the opinion suggests that reversal is mandatory if there is plain error, I disagree. To the extent that the opinion holds that our Court has discretion to decide whether relief is warranted even if it finds plain error, I agree. See United States v. Schlamer, 52 MJ 80, 86 (1999); United States v. Powell, 49 MJ 460, 464-65 (1998); United States v. Riley, 47 MJ 276, 281 (1997) (Gierke, J., concurring). Finally, to the extent that the lead opinion holds that appellant failed to carry his burden of persuading us that there was plain error, I agree.