When No Objection Made at Trial, Is Defective Jury Instruction ‘Structural Error Requiring a New Trial?
State of Ohio v. Timothy M. Wamsley, Case no. 2006-2135 7th District Court of Appeals (Columbiana County) ISSUE: In a criminal case, when the jury instructions given by a trial court did not explain every essential element of the charged offense, but the defendant failed to object to that deficiency at trial, should the defective jury instruction be considered a “structural error” that automatically requires a reviewing court to remand the case for a new trial, or should a reviewing court order a new trial only if it finds that the defective jury instruction was “plain error” that resulted in a “manifest miscarriage of justice?” BACKGROUND: This case asks the Court to review and apply Ohio and federal case law regarding the standard of review that a court of appeals should apply in determining whether an error in a trial court’s jury instructions that is not objected to at trial was so serious that it deprived a criminal defendant of his constitutional right to due process of law. Timo
