Kim Long Ko v. United States

694 A.2d 73, 1997 D.C. App. LEXIS 85, 1997 WL 229164

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated in the concurring opinion of Judge Sehwelb, except that a majority of the court does not adopt the discussion in Parts III-B. and III-C. (4) of Judge Schwelb’s opinion regarding the question whether the trial judge failed to comply with D.C.Code §§ 31-2704, -2711, and -2712 (1993). As to the interpretation of those provisions, the judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated in the concurring opinion of Judge Reid, with whom Judge Mack joins. Specifically, a majority of the court holds that there was error in these respects, but not plain error. Judge Sehwelb would hold only that there was no plain error.

Affirmed.