People v. Rathbone

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that it is not sufficient to “simply state that because sentencing affects the defendant’s fundamental right to liberty, any error committed at that stage is reviewable as plain error”
• holding that it is not sufficient to ‘simply state that because sentencing affects the defendant’s fundamental right to liberty, any error committed at that stage is reviewable as plain error’
• holding that it is not sufficient to ‘simply state that because sentencing affects the defendant’s fundamental right to liberty, any error committed at that stage is reviewable as plain error’
• concluding the alleged sentencing error was not plain error because the “claim addresse[d] the trial court’s exercise of its discretion, not the fairness of the proceedings or the integrity of the judicial process”
• concluding the alleged sentencing error was not plain error because the “claim addresse[d] the trial court’s exercise of its discretion, not the fairness of the proceedings or the integrity of the judicial process”
• noting the supreme court held a defendant must file a written post-sentencing motion to preserve sentencing errors for appellate review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).