Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard

215 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Goodwin v. State
  751 So. 2d 537· Fla.· 1999-12-16 ·cited 529×
  The Florida Supreme Court consolidated two cases to address whether section 924.051(7) of the Florida Statutes abrogated the harmless error analysis established in State v. DiGuilio. The Court held that the statute merely reaffirms existing harmless error standards and does not s
• Malcus T. Clemons v. United States
  408 F.2d 1230· D.C. Cir.· 1968-12-06 ·cited 266×
• McArthur Breedlove v. State
  413 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1982-03-04 ·cited 178×
  McArthur Breedlove was convicted of first-degree murder, burglary, and theft arising from a home invasion and stabbing death, and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and death sentence, rejecting challenges based on Brady violations, suppression
• Bailey v. United States
  389 F.2d 305· D.C. Cir.· 1967-12-14 ·cited 140×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the discovery of the stolen wallet provided probable cause for the search, and that probable cause for arrest justifies a vehicle search even if the arrest occurs after the search.
• United States v. Gipson
  553 F.2d 453· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-06 ·cited 138×
  A federal defendant's right to a unanimous jury verdict is violated if the jury is instructed that it can convict based on disagreement as to which of several distinct prohibited acts, falling into different conceptual groupings, the defendant committed.
• Duest v. State
  855 So. 2d 33· Fla.· 2003-06-26 ·cited 127×
  Duest appeals a death sentence reimposed after the previous death sentence was vacated due to a defective prior conviction aggravator. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the death sentence, holding that the trial court properly instructed the jury on aggravating circumstances, pro
• United States v. Odell Marshall
  526 F.2d 1349· 9th Cir.· 1975-10-31 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying motions to enjoin tax levies, for return of property, for dismissal or alternative funds, for extensive discovery, to suppress evidence seized incident to arrest, or to disclose informant identities, and that the searc
• State v. LEE
  531 So. 2d 133· Fla.· 1988-09-01 ·cited 76×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that erroneous admission of evidence regarding collateral crimes requires reversal when the state fails to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not affect the jury verdict, even if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming. The Cou
• United States v. Eaglin
  571 F.2d 1069· 9th Cir.· 1977-08-10 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for harboring an escaped federal prisoner was supported by sufficient evidence and that the jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, did not constitute plain error. The admission of certain hearsay statements was deemed harmless er
• Forman v. Smith
  633 F.2d 634· 2d Cir.· 1980-10-08 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the Wainwright v. Sykes 'cause and prejudice' standard applies to constitutional claims omitted from a direct appeal, and that the petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient cause or prejudice.
• United States v. Sebetich
  776 F.2d 412· 3d Cir.· 1985-10-31 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the exclusion of expert testimony on eyewitness identification reliability was an error requiring a remand for a hearing. It also found that statements made during preliminary discussions about potential plea bargains, not with a government attorney, were admi
• United States v. Goodwin
  770 F.2d 631· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-08 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the request for an investigator, that the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights were not violated by the judge's comments regarding her decision to testify, and that the denial of a new trial based on newly
• United States v. Errol B. Resnick
  483 F.2d 354· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-04 ·cited 54×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding that while the admission of one witness's testimony was erroneous, it was harmless error, and other challenges lacked merit.
• Bisaccia v. The Attorney Gen. of the State of N.J.
  623 F.2d 307· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 52×
  The court held that using a co-conspirator's guilty plea as evidence of a defendant's guilt violates the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• Solina v. United States
  709 F.2d 160· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 45×
  Representation by an unlicensed attorney, even if unknowingly, is a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel that cannot be treated as harmless error.
• Clark v. Dugger
  834 F.2d 1561· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's request for a psychiatric expert because the defendant failed to make a preliminary showing that his sanity was a significant factor at trial. The court also found no constitutional violations regarding ju
• Wilson v. Hon. Robert J. Henderson
  584 F.2d 1185· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-20 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the detective's continued interrogation after the suspect invoked his right to remain silent violated Miranda and Massiah principles.
• Dietz v. Warden
  640 F.2d 126· 8th Cir.· 1981-01-30 ·cited 43×
  A jury instruction creating a burden-shifting presumption of intent violates due process and requires federal habeas relief, even if not objected to at trial, provided the petitioner can show cause for the failure to object.
• United States v. Gunn
  428 F.2d 1057· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-25 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence obtained from the defendant's car was admissible, her arrest was lawful, and there was no unnecessary delay in her arraignment.
• United States v. Elmore
  423 F.2d 775· 4th Cir.· 1970-03-16 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the admission of evidence was proper and that prosecutorial remarks, while intemperate, did not prejudice the defendant, thus affirming the conviction.
• Bennie E. Demps v. Dugger
  874 F.2d 1385· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-28 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if Hitchcock error was harmless, and thus, a remand for an evidentiary hearing was necessary.
• Bowen v. Kemp
  832 F.2d 546· 11th Cir.· 1987-10-22 ·cited 38×
• Grizzell v. Louie L. Wainwright
  692 F.2d 722· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-29 ·cited 38×
  The use of prior uncounseled felony convictions to impeach a defendant's credibility, when those convictions are constitutionally invalid, constitutes a due process violation that is not harmless error if there is a reasonable possibility that the evidence influenced the jury's a
• United States v. Bynum
  566 F.2d 914· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-26 ·cited 38×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that severance was not required due to complexity or antagonistic defenses, and that evidentiary rulings and procedural matters were not abuses of discretion or reversible error.
• Ware v. United States
  376 F.2d 717· 7th Cir.· 1967-05-01 ·cited 38×
  The court held that a defendant's absence during jury communication, while a procedural impropriety, does not automatically require reversal if the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Hughes A. Bagley
  641 F.2d 1235· 9th Cir.· 1981-01-30 ·cited 36×
  The court should have remanded for a new trial due to extrinsic evidence potentially affecting the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Liddy
  542 F.2d 76· D.C. Cir.· 1976-05-17 ·cited 36×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the appellant's constitutional rights were not violated by the dismissal of a prior state prosecution, the application of 18 U.S.C. § 241, or the denial of a lesser included offense charge.
• United States v. Pravato
  505 F.2d 703· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-11 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the admission of a scrap of paper found in an open suitcase was harmless error, and affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence on one count due to erroneous concurrent sentencing.
• Thomas v. Savage
  513 F.2d 536· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-23 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the introduction of a prior uncounseled misdemeanor conviction at the punishment stage of a felony trial, even if constitutionally invalid, can be harmless error if the state proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it did not affect the sentence imposed.
• Thomas v. Kemp
  796 F.2d 1322· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court properly granted habeas corpus relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel at the sentencing phase due to failure to present mitigating evidence.
• United States v. Dupuy
  760 F.2d 1492· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a district court errs by accepting conceded Brady material and failing to disclose it or determine its discoverability. The prosecutor's duty to disclose exculpatory material under Brady v. Maryland cannot be shifted to the court.
• United States v. KEY
  725 F.2d 1123· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-18 ·cited 34×
  The admission of a non-testifying co-defendant's confession that directly incriminated the appellant and was vital to the government's case violated the appellant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, constituting plain error.
• United States v. Winston
  447 F.2d 1236· D.C. Cir.· 1971-06-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting rebuttal testimony concerning a pretrial identification, as the defense had opened the door by raising the issue of the confrontation.
• YAM Sang Kwai v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  411 F.2d 683· D.C. Cir.· 1969-02-17 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the deportation order, finding that the appellant was not subjected to an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Rollie Blankenship
  746 F.2d 233· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the mail fraud conviction, the jury instructions were not plainly erroneous, and the cross-examination regarding the defendant's silence was permissible.
• United States v. Rowan
  518 F.2d 685· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-11 ·cited 33×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding no reversible error in evidentiary rulings, jury procedures, or jury instructions, and holding that any errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Lancaster v. Lanson Newsome
  880 F.2d 362· 11th Cir.· 1989-08-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the unconstitutional jury instruction regarding intent was harmless error because the evidence overwhelmingly established the defendant's intent to kill, and that Brady claims were procedurally defaulted.
• Green v. Loggins
  614 F.2d 219· 9th Cir.· 1980-02-25 ·cited 32×
  An accidental pre-trial encounter between an accused and a witness can support a federal habeas corpus claim if the encounter was unnecessarily suggestive and undermined the reliability of the subsequent identification.
• United States v. Gigax
  605 F.2d 507· 10th Cir.· 1979-08-13 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in failing to recuse himself, in handling juror communications, or in denying standby counsel, and that the conviction was not tainted by prejudicial publicity.
• Egger v. United States
  509 F.2d 745· 9th Cir.· 1975-01-02 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a defendant's failure to object to alleged constitutional errors at trial generally waives the right to raise them in a collateral attack, unless the errors are so fundamental as to deny a fair trial.
• Creech v. A.J. Arave
  947 F.2d 873· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-27 ·cited 31×
  The panel erred in holding that Idaho's statutory aggravating factor of 'utter disregard for human life' is unconstitutionally vague, failing to give adequate deference to the Idaho Supreme Court's limiting construction.
• United States v. Flemming Anderson
  498 F.2d 1038· D.C. Cir.· 1974-05-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination of a defendant regarding his silence at the time of arrest, after being informed of his right to remain silent, was constitutionally impermissible and prejudicial error. However, a co-defendant's conviction was affirmed as hi
• United States v. Baynes
  687 F.2d 659· 3d Cir.· 1982-08-11 ·cited 29×
  The court held that trial counsel's failure to investigate potentially exculpatory voice exemplar evidence constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, and that prejudice must be shown for habeas relief.
• Clark v. Blackburn
  632 F.2d 531· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-10 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the government's deliberate concealment of a material eyewitness, who later testified in a manner exculpating the petitioner, constituted a deprivation of due process that was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Passaro
  624 F.2d 938· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's failure to present exculpatory evidence were proper, the search of the defendant's wallet incident to arrest was lawful, and any potential Fifth Amendment violation from a single ambiguous prosecutorial comment was
• United States v. Huntley
  535 F.2d 1400· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-29 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the defendants' absence during the rendition of judgment was a harmless error, and that the evidence was sufficient to convict them of interstate transportation of falsely made securities.
• United States v. Wick
  416 F.2d 61· 7th Cir.· 1969-08-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while admitting evidence of the defendant's silence during interrogation was error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the overwhelming evidence. The court also held that giving a jury instruction regarding the defendant's right not to testify was
• Solomon Willis v. State
  840 So. 2d 1135· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-03-26 ·cited 27×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, reversed the summary denial of a postconviction relief motion. The court found that the appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, based on the failure to instruct the jury on a lesser-included offense, was facia
• United States v. Indian BOY X
  565 F.2d 585· 9th Cir.· 1977-12-02 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the juvenile's confession was admissible, the destruction of FBI notes was harmless error, and the government met its burden of proof for federal jurisdiction. The court affirmed the conviction.
• Lacy v. Gardino
  791 F.2d 980· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that while a Sixth Amendment violation occurred, it was harmless error because the unmasked information was cumulative and did not contribute to the verdict.