Abstract
Mark White, Appellant, and the State of Montana, Appellee, argue whether White received the due process rights afforded to him under the Montana Constitution. White claims that (1) his absence during a critical stage of his trial caused him prejudice; and (2) the State’s failure to afford him an initial appearance constituted plain error and violated his Constitutional rights. The State argues that this is not an appropriate case for the Court to invoke discretionary power of plain error review because White had no right to be present during the proceeding in question, and White invited or acquiesced to any error that may have occurred by his absence from the initial appearance.
Recommended Citation
Mike Wilson, Oral Argument Preview, State v. White: Does Critical Mean Contested?, 75 Mont. L. Rev. Online 54, https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr_online/vol75/iss1/11.
