Does the plain error rule permit affirmance of a federal criminal conviction and sentence based on conduct that concededly does not violate the charged statute?

QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioner was indicted, tried, convicted and consecutively sentenced to lengthy terms of imprisonment. On direct appeal, the court agreed that his charged conduct was not prohibited by the statute invoked in two of the counts. Yet the court held that this conclusion, while not doubtful as a matter of statutory construction, failed to establish an error that was “plain” within the meaning of Federal Criminal Rule 52(b). The Question Presented is: Does the plain error rule permit affirmance of a federal criminal conviction and sentence based on conduct that concededly does not violate the charged statute? i LIST OF ALL PARTIES The caption of the case in this Court contains the names of all parties (petitioner Jabateh and respondent United States). There were no co-defendants at trial and no co-appellants. ii QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioner was indicted, tried, convicted and consecutively sentenced to lengthy terms of imprisonment. On direct appeal, the court agreed that his charged conduct was not prohibited by the statute invoked in two of the counts. Yet the court held that this conclusion, while not doubtful as a matter of statutory construction, failed to establish an error that was “plain” within the meaning of Federal Criminal Rule 52(b). The Question Presented is: Does the plain error rule permit affirmance of a federal criminal conviction and sentence based on conduct that concededly does not violate the charged statute? i LIST OF ALL PARTIES The caption of the case in this Court contains the names of all parties (petitioner Jabateh and respondent United States). There were no co-defendants at trial and no co-appellants. ii