Also known as: plain errors · plain-error · plain-error doctrine · plain-error review
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An appellate doctrine authorizing a reviewing court to correct an obvious error that was not preserved at trial when the error affects substantial rights of a party.
During closing argument the prosecutor told the jury that Carrie had to prove where the missing cash had gone. Defense counsel remained silent. After conviction Carrie raised the issue for the first time in a post-trial motion. The appellate court reaches the claim because the remark shifted the burden of proof and affected substantial rights even without a contemporaneous objection.
The trial court instructed the jury that Angelica's failure to testify could serve as evidence of guilt. Defense counsel did not object. After conviction Angelica contends on appeal that the instruction requires reversal. The court of appeals may consider the claim because the error was plain and implicated a core constitutional protection affecting substantial rights.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The trial court admitted evidence without a proper foundation. Defense counsel failed to object at the time the evidence was offered. After conviction the defendant raises the admission on appeal. The appellate court may review the claim under the plain error standard because the error affected substantial rights even though it was not preserved.
The court instructed the jury that it could treat Clara's decision not to testify as evidence of guilt. Defense counsel did not object. After conviction Clara argues on appeal that the instruction violated her constitutional rights. The appellate court may consider the unpreserved claim because the error was plain and affected substantial rights.
During closing the prosecutor stated that Uriah had offered no explanation for missing cash and urged the jury to hold him accountable. Defense counsel remained silent. After conviction new counsel raises the comment on appeal. The court may reach the issue because the remark implicated the presumption of innocence and affected substantial rights.
Valerie submitted a written request for a good-faith security research instruction immediately after both parties rested. The prosecutor had no prior notice. The judge declined to consider the request. On appeal Frances contends the refusal was error. The appellate court may review the claim under the plain error doctrine because the refusal affected substantial rights.
An appellate court may review a plain error that affects substantial rights even though the error was not brought to the trial court's attention. The rule exists to prevent miscarriages of justice arising from obvious constitutional violations that counsel failed to flag.
Supporting sources
Reversals for plain error are rare in civil cases. Courts are more willing to find plain error in criminal cases because liberty and life are at stake and the prosecution cannot appeal an acquittal.
Supporting sources
The defendant must establish that an error occurred, that the error was plain or obvious under current law, that the error affected substantial rights, and that the error seriously affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.
Supporting sources
A general pretrial objection that fails to state specific grounds on the record when evidence is offered does not preserve the claim. The rule requires a timely, specific objection that alerts the court to the precise evidentiary concern.
Supporting sources
A court may take notice of a plain error affecting a substantial right even if the claim of error was not properly preserved. An egregious mistake such as admitting inherently prejudicial evidence may qualify as plain error.
Supporting sources
…. . in its legitimacy, a product of substance and perception," ante , at 865, the "substance" part of the equation demands that plain error be acknowledged and eliminated. Roe was plainly wrong—even on the Court's methodology of "reasoned judgment," and even more so (of course) if the proper criteria of text and tradition are…