dollars.” Trial Transcript at 1020. In its closing, the defense claimed that the relationship between Jockiseh and Reed Fire Protection was not hidden from the public and that the omission on the disclosure form was meaningless: “Anybody that was interested in Reed at all or anybody interested in Jockiseh at all could have gone out there and seen them doing the work that they did.” Trial Transcript at 1055. Under plain error review, the defendant has the burden of proving not only plain and obvious error, but error affecting his substantial rights that also affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial proceedings. Johnson, 520 U.S. at 466-67, 117 S.Ct. at 1548-49; see also United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 736, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 1779, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (<HOLDING>). Defendant was unable to point to any manner
holding that courts may only review claims for fundamental miscarriage of justice holding that the district court should grant a motion for a new trial when the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice emphasis added holding that the plainerror doctrine applies in those circumstances in which absent appellate intervention a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result holding that courts of appeal should only correct a forfeited error at the trial level in those circumstances in which a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of justice