Preview of Member Only Content
For full access: or Become a Member
Henderson v. United States And the Plain Error Rule: Metaphysics, Unicorns, and Injustice (Inside NACDL)
By Norman L. Reimer
Inside NACDL columns.
Author’s Note: The article originally appeared in JURIST (http://jurist.org), a Web-based legal news and legal research service at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law in Pittsburgh, Pa.
Imagine a criminal prosecution in which a trial judge unlawfully imposed a far longer sentence on a young man than the law prescribed, even though his lawyer, the prosecutor, and every appellate judge reviewing the sentence agreed that was the case. Now imagine that notwithstanding the universal agreement that the sentence was improperly enhanced, the man cannot obtain relief from the courts. Well, such has been the fate of Armarcion Henderson, whose case, Henderson v. United States, was argued before the Supreme Court on Nov. 28, 2012.
Mr. Henderson, who was 26 years old at the time of his sentencing, had entered a plea of guilty to a single-count indictment that charged him with being a felon in possession of a firearm. He faced a sentence of 33 to 41 months under the advisory Sente
Want to read more?
The Champion archive is reserved for NACDL members.
NACDL members, please login to read the rest of this article.
Not a member? Join now.
Or click here to see an overview of NACDL Member benefits.
See what NACDL members say about us.
To read the current issue of The Champion in its entirety, click here.
- Media inquiries: Contact NACDL's Director of Public Affairs & Communications Ivan J. Dominguez at 202-465-7662 or email@example.com
- Academic Requests: Full articles of The Champion Magazine are available for academic and research purposes in the WestLaw and LexisNexis databases.