Whether a court of appeals may consider judicially noticeable facts presented for the first time on appeal in deciding whether an error is plain?

QUESTION PRESENTED Mr. Fifield’s criminal history score under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines turned on whether he was “arrested” for a traffic violation or merely issued a ticket. The presentence report indicated that he had been arrested, Mr. Fifield did not object, and the district court sentenced him accordingly. On appeal, Mr. Fifield presented state court documents conclusively establishing the now-undisputed fact that he was ticketed for the violation, not arrested, and thus the guidelines calculation was plainly erroneous. The Tenth Circuit rejected his claim, holding that any error was not plain based on the record presented to the district court. The question presented is: Whether a court of appeals may consider judicially noticeable facts presented for the first time on appeal in deciding whether an error is plain? i