In the recent case of United States v. McBride, following procedural rules took center stage. A stern warning was delivered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit against disregarding procedural requirements: “those who do so play a dangerous game and do so at their peril.” The court declined to examine the appellant’s merits arguments due to several procedural errors, such as invited error, failure to articulate the applicable standards of review and failure to request plain error review for unpreserved issues. This decision underscores the essential procedural requirements to preserve issues for review in both the trial court and on appeal.
The facts of the case revolve around Whitney McBride and her company, Odyssey, who secured a $99 million government contract. To receive the contract, Odyssey needed to be “HUBZone-eligible,” meaning at least 35% of its employees had to live in a Historically Underutilized Business Zone. However, Odyssey was not eligible. Regardless, McBride managed to make the company appear eligible by manipulating the figures and financial records, as stated in the court’s opinion.
While McBride’s criminal actions formed the case’s backbone, the court’s decision highlights the importance of adhering to procedural rules. It serves as a critical reminder to legal professionals across the globe about the crucial role that procedural compliance plays within the judicial system.