United States v. Guy W. Olano, JR., and Raymond M. Gray (507 U.S. 725)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 26, 1993 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 507 U.S. 725 · 113 S. Ct. 1770
- Decided
- April 26, 1993
- Term
- October Term 1992
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice O'Connor
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court. The question in this case is whether the presence of alternate jurors during jury deliberations was a “plain error” that the Court of Appeals was authorized to correct under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b). I Each of the respondents, Guy W. Olano, Jr., and Raymond M. Gray, served on the board of directors of a savings and loan association. In 1986, the two were indicted in the Western District of Washington on multiple federal charges for their participation in an elaborate loan “kickback” scheme. Their joint jury trial with five other codefendants commenced in March 1987. All of the parties agreed that 14 jurors would be selected to hear the case, and that the 2 alternates would be identified before deliberations began. On May 26, shortly before the end of the 3-month trial, the District Court suggested to the defendants that the two alternate jurors, soon to be identified, might be allowed to attend deliberations along with the regular jurors: “. . . I’d just like you to think about it, you have a day, let me know, it’s just a suggestion and you can — if there is even one person who doesn’t like it we won’t do it, but it is a suggestion that other courts have followed in long cases where jurors have sat through a lot of testimony, and that is to let the alternates go in but not participate, but just to sit in on…
Excerpt of a 28,729-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.