Finally, the Government and dissent maintain that the Court’s decision will create an opportunity for “sandbagging” that Rule 52(b) is supposed to prevent. But that concern fails to account for the realities at play in sentencing proceedings, where it is highly speculative that a defendant would benefit from a strategy of deliberately forgoing an objection in the district court, with hopes of arguing for reversal under plain-error review later. The Fifth Circuit’s decision is reversed and remanded.
Justice Sotomayor’s majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kennedy, Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Kagan, and Justice Gorsuch. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion in which he was joined by Justice Alito.
Another point that builds relate to Justice Sotomayor’s last point, is that it is the Court’s and prosecutions duty to also make sure that the relevant factors are considered at sentencing and irrelevant factors not considered. Moreover, there is no concern for the reversal of a conviction, but only the reversal of a sentence. As noted, a remand for re-sentencing is a very brief proceeding compared to a remand for a new trial.