In the 1983 case James v. Kentucky, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a defendant's right to due process was violated when a trial court refused his request for an instruction on his theory of defense, provided there was evidence supporting it and legal principles backing its relevance to the charges against him. The petitioner, James, had been convicted in state court for possession of heroin with intent to distribute. He requested jury instructions regarding entrapment but was denied by both lower courts because he did not admit all elements of the offense (a requirement under Kentucky law). However, this ruling contradicted previous federal cases where defendants were allowed such instructions without admitting guilt. The Supreme Court reversed these decisions and remanded the case back to state courts for further proceedings consistent with their opinion.

In the dissenting opinion for James v. Kentucky, Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring defense counsel to object immediately after an improper instruction was given by a judge undermined the defendant's right to a fair trial. He contended that this rule placed an unreasonable burden on defense attorneys and could lead to unjust outcomes if they failed to raise objections at precisely the correct moment during proceedings. Furthermore, he believed it contradicted previous Supreme Court rulings which emphasized substance over procedure in ensuring defendants' rights were protected. In his view, even though James’ attorney did not object immediately but raised concerns before jury deliberation began should have been sufficient enough for consideration of his client’s constitutional claim about incorrect instructions regarding presumption of innocence.