Whether the Fifth Circuit misapplied the plain error doctrine to bar review of the defendant's claim that the prosecution wrongly relied on a hearsay statement of his codefendant made after the codefendant's arrest

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW I. THIS COURT SHOULD GRANT CERTIORARI BECAUSE THE FIFTH CIRCUIT’S MISAPPLICATION OF THE PLAIN ERROR DOCTRINE TO BAR REVIEW OF QUINN’S CLAIM THAT THE PROSECUTION WRONGLY RELIED ON A HEARSAY STATEMENT OF HIS CODEFENDANT MADE AFTER THE CODEFENDANT’S ARREST IN ORDER TO SECURE LENIENCY. SPECIICALLY, IN APPLYING PLAIN ERROR REVIEW, THE COURT ERRONEOUSLY OVERRULED A FACTUAL CONCESSION MADE BY THE GOVERNMENT IN ITS BRIEFS THAT QUINN PRESERVED THE ERROR BY OBJECTING TO THE STATEMENT AS HEARSAY, THE SAME GROUND HE RAISED IN HIS APPELLATE BRIEF. II]. EVEN IF PLAIN ERROR IS THE APPROPRIATE STANDARD OF REVIEW, THE FIFTH CIRCUIT IGNORED THE PURPOSE OF THIS COURT’S DECISION IN TOME AND CASE LAW FROM OTHER CIRCUITS THAT HAVE EXCLUDED PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENTS GIVEN AT THE TIME OF ARREST EVEN WHERE FOLLOWED BY PLEA AGREEMENTS. THIS COURT, THEREFORE, SHOULD GRANT THE PETITION BECAUSE THE FIFTH CIRCUIT’S DECISION IS INCONSISTENT WITH TOME AND CASE LAW FROM OTHER CIRCUITS. LIST OF ALL PARTIES The undersigned counsel of record certifies that all