ARBELAEZ-AGUDELO

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Barrington, 648 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 2011)
  …pra. We review for plain error because Barrington did not object to the district court’s instructions. Fed.R.Crim.P. 30(d); United States v. Belfast, supra; United States v. Sanchez, 269 F. 3d 1250, 1280-81 (11th Cir.2001) (en banc), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 942, 122 S.Ct. 1327, 152 L.Ed.2d 234 (2002). The district court instructed the jury that it could find Barrington guilty “only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: First: That the defendant knowingly possessed a means of…
• United States v. Hall, 312 F.3d 1250 (11th Cir. 2002)
  …ild pornography in convicting him. Because Hall did not object to this jury instruction defining child pornography, we review this issue for plain error. See United States v. Sanchez, 269 F. 3d 1250, 1280-81 (11th Cir.2001) (en banc), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 942, 122 S.Ct. 1327, 152 L.Ed.2d 234 (2002). Thus, Hall must show that there is (1) “error,” (2) “that is ‘plain,’ ” and (3) “that ‘affect[sj substantial rights.’ ” Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 466-67, 117 S.Ct. 1544, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997)…