United States v. Young (1985)
Supreme Court
470 U.S. 1 (1985)
Young (defendant), a petroleum company president, was prosecuted after supplying a customer with less valuable blended fuel oil while representing it as crude oil; during closing argument, Young's attorney suggested without objection that the prosecution did not genuinely believe Young intended to commit fraud, and on rebuttal the prosecutor, also without objection, responded by sharing his own personal opinions about Young's guilt and witness credibility. Young was convicted and appealed, and the court of appeals held the prosecutor's rebuttal statements constituted plain error warranting a new trial; the government sought Supreme Court review.
Whether inappropriate statements by the prosecution rise to the level of reversible plain error when they are invited by the statements of defense counsel and do no more than offset the prejudicial influence of the statements of defense counsel.