The Supreme Court will review claimed errors where failing to do so may result in a manifest miscarriage of justice, leave the question of fundamental fairness of the proceedings unsettled, or compromise the integrity of the judicial process. The Supreme Court uses its inherent power of common-law plain error review sparingly, on a case-by-case basis, and only in the aforementioned circumstances. State v. Rovin, 2009 MT 16, ¶ 29, 349 Mont. 57; 201 P.3d 780; see also State v. Finley, 276 Mont. 126,137-38, 915 P.2d 208, 215 (1996), overruled on other grounds, State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39, 304 Mont. 215, 19 P.3d 817.
"We will not undertake full analysis of the alleged error each time a party requests plain error review. State v. Griffin, 2016 MT 231, ¶ 7, 385 Mont. 1, 386 P.3d 559. Conducting a full analysis in order to determine whether to find plain error would defeat the underlying rule that a party must object to error at trial, because errors should be brought to the attention of the trial court where they can be initially addressed. Griffin, ¶ 7."