Document Type


Publication Date



In this article, I attempt to do two things at once. First, I attempt to analyze the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to conduct "plain-error" review of state court decisions. The plain-error issue merits consideration not only because of its intrinsic interest and arguable complexity, but also because the question whether the Supreme Court is authorized to engage in plain-error review is an open one that I would like to help resolve. My second objective, however, is the more important of the two. In the context of analyzing plain-error review, what I really want to do is analyze legal analysis itself. There are a variety of ways to approach legal problems, which can be usefully divided into two categories. One category strikes me as sensible, the other as silly. In the process of analyzing the plain-error issue, I hope to demonstrate which is which.

Publication Citation

71 Geo. L. J. 945 (1982-1983)