State v. Lawrence
Annotate this CaseDefendant David Lawrence was convicted by a jury for two counts each of attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon, attempted kidnapping, attempted breaking and entering, and conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon. On appeal, the court of appeals held that the trial court's erroneous jury instructions on conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon amounted to plain error and granted Defendant a new trial on that charge. The Supreme Court reversed, holding (1) the court of appeals applied an incorrect formulation of the plain error standard of review; and (2) Defendant failed to meet his burden of demonstrating plain error because, in light of the evidence, Defendant could not show that, absent the error, the jury probably would have returned a different verdict, and thus, he could not show the prejudicial effect necessary to establish that the error was a fundamental error.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.