Whether the Eleventh Circuit has created a new exception to Molina-Martinez's plain error prejudice standard which conflicts with the general rule that Molina-Martinez establishes

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW In Molina-Martinez v. United States, 578 U.S. 189 (2016), this Court held that for purposes of plain error review, a “court’s reliance on an incorrect [sentencing] range in most instances will suffice to show an effect on the defendant’s substantial rights,” and that “[a]bsent unusual circumstances, [the defendant] will not be required to show more” to obtain relief for a plain guideline error. Molina-Martinez, 578 U.S. at 201. The question presented for review is: Whether the Eleventh Circuit has created a new exception to Molina-Martinez’s plain error prejudice standard which conflicts with the general rule that MolinaMartinez establishes. ‘ INTERESTED PARTIES There are no