Whether an appellate court can consider evidence outside the trial record to conclude that a Rehaif-based error did not seriously affect the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings

QUESTION PRESENTED In Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019), this Court held that knowledge-of-status was an element of the crime set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). Where a defendant is charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) in an indictment that does not allege the knowledge-of-status element of the offense, the jury is not instructed to find that same element, and the evidence is insufficient to prove that element and thus, defendant’s guilt, can an appellate court, on plain error review, consider evidence that was never presented to the jury in order to conclude that the failure to correct the errors would not seriously affect the fairness, reputation or integrity of judicial proceedings? i