Harm from sentencing errors
Paul Horton Smith, Sr. v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Paul Horton Smith asked the Supreme Court to decide whether a defendant must show that an error harmed him to get a sentence overturned when the error was not raised in court and involved a federal sentencing rule.
- Who it affects
- Smith’s case will not receive Supreme Court review, and the Court did not decide the sentencing question.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court refused to hear Smith’s case (denied review), so it did not decide that question.
Smith’s petition raised a question about a federal sentencing rule and the harm a defendant must show under plain-error review.
Question presented
Whether, in the context of plain error review, a defendant must demonstrate prejudice in order to obtain reversal of his sentence due to a district court’s Fed. R. Crim. Pro. 32(i)(1)(A) error?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.