Circuit split · criminal procedure

Whether a defendant's stipulation to an element of an offense removes that element from the jury's consideration and relieves the government of its burden to prove it via jury instruction

1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.

United States v. Barrow118 F3D 482
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · July 2, 1997
“First, in light the circuit split regarding the effect of a stipulated instruction regarding an element of an offense and the lack of definitive precedent in this Circuit, the error was not “plain.” — Acknowledges a circuit split
Empirical analysis of this case →

The other side of the split

Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.

Declined to follow · 6th Cir.United States v. Jones65 F.3d 520
“The defendant in Jones was charged with possession of a firearm after a prior conviction of a felony.” — United States v. Barrow, acknowledging the split
Discussed · 6th Cir.United States v. Prujansky415 F.2d 1045

What the split turns on

Doctrines & tests:: plain-error test (Olano / Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b))

Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.