Greer v. United States

Background

A man tried by jury and another who pleaded guilty were each convicted of possessing a firearm after earlier felony convictions. After this Court’s Rehaif decision clarified that the government must prove a defendant knew he was a felon when possessing a gun, both men raised new arguments on appeal that their trials and plea colloquy omitted that knowledge requirement.

Reasoning

The Court held that both men had forfeited those claims by failing to object and therefore faced plain-error review, which requires showing an error, that it was obvious, and that it affected substantial rights — meaning a reasonable probability of a different outcome. Although the Court agreed the Rehaif errors were plain, it found neither defendant showed a reasonable probability they would have been acquitted or would not have pleaded guilty. Both had multiple prior felony convictions that provided strong evidence they knew their status. The Court rejected a proposed “futility” exception to plain-error review and also rejected treating these errors as automatically reversible structural defects. The Court said appellate courts may consider the whole record, including reliable information about prior convictions.

Real world impact

Going forward, convicted felons who failed to object at trial or plea must on appeal make a specific showing that they would have presented evidence that they did not know they were felons. Appellate courts can weigh records showing prior convictions when deciding whether the plain-error test is met. This ruling does not eliminate Rehaif but limits when it can undo convictions.

Dissents or concurrances

A Justice concurred in part and dissented in part, agreeing that automatic reversal was improper but urging that one defendant’s appeal be returned to the lower court to permit a case-specific showing; she also warned that harmless-error review (when objections were made) is different and that knowledge of status must still be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.