per concurring opinion of Schwelb, J., for a majority of the court
How later courts described this case
- per concurring opinion of Schwelb, J., for a majority of the court
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
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.