{"argument_date":"2004-04-21T00:00:00Z","arguments":[{"argument_date":"2004-04-21T00:00:00Z","heading":"What happened at the argument","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2003","official_transcript_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","paragraphs":["The government asserts that prior cases require outcome impact for substantial rights.","The defendant asserts that the lower court framework has been applied for eleven years.","chief_justice_rehnquist_closed_the_argument_by_stating_the_case_was_submitted."],"reargument":false,"sequence":1,"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-14","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 4-14"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 2-6","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 54, lines 2-6"}]}],"caption":"United States v. Dominguez Benitez","case_history":[{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:30.176750Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"}],"case_status":"argued","dek":"The government argues outcome impact is required. The defendant argues the lower court applied the wrong standard.","dek_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"}],"dispositions":[],"latest_court_document_date":"2004-04-21T00:00:00Z","maturity":"official_transcript","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2003","official_disposition_urls":[],"official_docket_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/03-167.html","primary_docket":"03-167","revisions":[{"correction_note":"Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.","created_at":"2026-08-31T15:34:55.415947Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":1},{"correction_note":"Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.","created_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":2}],"schema_version":"1.1","sections":[{"heading":"What this case is about","paragraphs":["The case tests how courts review forfeited Rule 11 errors. The government seeks a strict outcome test. The defendant seeks a broader review standard."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"}]},{"heading":"How the case got here","paragraphs":["The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 21, 2004."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-14","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 4-14"}]},{"heading":"What each side wants","paragraphs":["The government wants the Court to require proof that the error changed the outcome.","The defendant wants the Court to reject the strict outcome impact requirement."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"}]},{"heading":"What each side says","paragraphs":["The government argues that an error must affect substantial rights to be reversible.","The defendant argues that the lower court framework for eleven years is flawed."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"}]},{"heading":"What the justices asked","paragraphs":["Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case was submitted."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 2-6","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 54, lines 2-6"}]},{"heading":"Why it matters","paragraphs":["This dispute defines the standard for reviewing forfeited procedural errors. It determines how courts weigh Rule 11 violations. It affects the finality of criminal convictions."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"}]},{"heading":"What happens next","paragraphs":["This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-14","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 4-14"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 2-6","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 54, lines 2-6"}]}],"slug":"2003-03-167-united-states-v-dominguez-benitez","term":"2003","title":"Does a forfeited Rule 11 error require proof of outcome impact?","title_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-40","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 25, lines 38-40"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2003/03-167.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 16-2"}],"topics":[],"undated_disposition_date_fallback":null,"updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z"}