occurs when, “after review [of] the entire record, [we] can say with fair assurance that the error so undermined the fundamental fairness of the trial itself as to cast serious doubt on the reliability of the judgment of conviction.” Wilson v. People, 743 P.2d 415, 420 (Colo.1987). When the record is considered as a whole, the admission of Ortiz’s testimony during the prosecution’s case-in-chief, and not as rebuttal testimony, did not rise to the level of plain error. Kruse’s theory of defense was self-defense and was raised in the defense’s opening statement immediately after the prosecution’s opening statement. Kruse testified that the stabbing occurred in self-defense and the closing argument for the defense centered on Kruse’s testimony and the self-defense theo 35, 1136 (1975) (<HOLDING>). The constitutional arguments are not properly
holding that even a remand by the supreme court for reconsideration in light of an intervening court opinion does not require the court to consider an argument raised for the first time in a petition for certiorari holding it is settled that the supreme court may consider questions raised on the first appeal after which the court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari as well as those that were before the court of appeals upon the second appeal after which the court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari internal quotation marks omitted recognizing that where a state prisoner declines to pursue certiorari in the united states supreme court that petitioners conviction is not final  until  after the time for filing a petition for certiorari with the supreme court has passed holding that supreme court would not consider issue not mentioned either in petition for rehearing or in petition for certiorari even though matter was argued before it holding that supreme court need not consider issue not raised in petition for certiorari