Harmless Error Analysis

4,441 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 2,602 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Dixon
  562 F.2d 1138· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-13 ·cited 49×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the hearsay statement was improperly admitted under the coconspirator exception as to Dixon.
• United States v. Yeager
  476 F.2d 613· 3d Cir.· 1973-03-30 ·cited 49×
  The court held that a prosecutor's comment on a defendant's consultation with an attorney after a crime, which suggests guilt, constitutes a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and such error is not harmless when the defendant's credibility is central to the case.
• United States v. Thornbrugh
  962 F.2d 1438· 10th Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that while the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and no individual error warranted reversal, the sentence was improperly enhanced under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1).
• United States v. Masat
  896 F.2d 88· 5th Cir.· 1990-02-28 ·cited 48×
  The court held that a significant error in jury instructions, which allowed conviction based solely on omission rather than an affirmative act, requires reversal and remand for a new trial. Other claims of error were found to be without merit.
• Marino v. Vasquez
  812 F.2d 499· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that jury misconduct involving an unauthorized dictionary definition of malice and an out-of-court experiment created a reasonable possibility of prejudice, warranting habeas relief for murder and attempted murder convictions, but not for felony false imprisonment.
• United States v. Harry Christian (84-5843)
  786 F.2d 203· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-13 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial based on undisclosed evidence, nor in limiting cross-examination, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• Simmons, Inc. v. Pinkerton's, Inc.
  762 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-28 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The dissenting judge argues that the erroneous jury instruction and admission of irrelevant evidence were not harmless errors and warrant a new trial.
• Wilson v. Mintzes
  761 F.2d 275· 6th Cir.· 1985-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial judge acted unreasonably in denying the defendant's request for substitute counsel, thus violating the Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice.
• United States v. Waterman
  732 F.2d 1527· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-02 ·cited 48×
  The court held that a contingent agreement between the government and a key prosecution witness, promising a sentence reduction based on the witness's testimony leading to further indictments, violates the due process clause by creating an unacceptable risk of perjury.
• Shriner v. Louie L. Wainwright
  715 F.2d 1452· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the denial of the habeas corpus petition was proper, as there were no constitutional infirmities in the state proceedings regarding Shriner's conviction or sentence.
• Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n
  599 F.2d 453· 1st Cir.· 1979-05-23 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  The court held that the Review Commission did not err in affirming the citation, as the employer's defense of idiosyncratic employee behavior automatically raises the issue of adequate training and supervision, and the employer was not ultimately prejudiced by any misleading stat
• United States v. Siegel
  587 F.2d 721· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-11 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the appellant received a fair trial, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2314.
• Swicegood v. State OF Ala.
  577 F.2d 1322· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-11 ·cited 48×
  The court held that while the Fourth Amendment claim regarding the arrest was barred by Stone v. Powell, the lineup identification procedures were so suggestive and unreliable as to violate due process.
• United States v. Zarattini
  552 F.2d 753· 7th Cir.· 1977-03-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the grand jury process was not abused, discovery rules were followed, evidentiary rulings were proper, and jury instructions were adequate, leading to the affirmance of the convictions.
• Ashford v. State
  274 So. 2d 517· Fla.· 1973-02-21 ·cited 48×
  Willie Ashford was convicted of rape and sentenced to death. After Furman v. Georgia mandated reconsideration of death sentences, he was resentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, Ashford challenged the admission of eyewitness identification testimony obtained through pre-indic
• United States v. Collins
  462 F.2d 792· 2d Cir.· 1972-03-07 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
• United States v. Handman
  447 F.2d 853· 7th Cir.· 1971-07-21 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments on the uncontradicted nature of a key witness's testimony, implying the defendant's failure to testify, constituted prejudicial error, especially when combined with arguments vouching for the witness's truthfulness.
• Kauffman v. Secretary OF THE AIR Force
  415 F.2d 991· D.C. Cir.· 1969-06-26 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  Civilian courts have jurisdiction to review court-martial convictions even if the serviceman is not in custody, and the standard of review for constitutional errors should be the same as for state and federal convictions.
• Schaffer v. Universal Rundle Corp.
  397 F.2d 893· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that a sole stockholder cannot sue in his own name for damages to the corporation, and that the jury's verdict likely included damages for the individual, requiring a new trial for the corporation. The court affirmed the dismissal of antitrust claims.
• Goldsmith v. United States
  277 F.2d 335· D.C. Cir.· 1960-03-17 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  The court held that confessions obtained in violation of Rule 5(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, specifically the prompt arraignment requirement, are inadmissible.
• Seabrooks v. United States
  32 F.4th 1375· 11th Cir.· 2022-05-06 ·cited 47×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the Supreme Court's decision in Rehaif v. United States applies retroactively to initial § 2255 motions, and the district court's error in giving an aiding and abetting instruction without proof of knowledge of the co-defendant's felon status was no
• Diaz v. State
  860 So. 2d 960· Fla.· 2003-09-11 ·cited 47×
  Joel Diaz was convicted of the first-degree murder of Charles Shaw and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, striking the heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) aggravating factor as harmless error but upholding the cold, calculated
• Knowles v. State
  848 So. 2d 1055· Fla.· 2003-06-12 ·cited 47×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded a Second District Court of Appeal decision that upheld Knowles's murder conviction despite erroneous admission of privileged expert testimony. The Court clarified that the proper harmless error standard on direct appeal is the DiGui
• Griffin v. State
  820 So. 2d 906· Fla.· 2002-05-30 ·cited 47×
  Michael Griffin was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and death sentences, finding the sentences constitutional and proportionate, and rejecting his challenges to the jury waiver, mitigating e
• Jackson v. State
  818 So. 2d 539· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-01-18 ·cited 47×
  Terrance Jackson was convicted by jury of cocaine possession with intent to sell, marijuana possession, and felony fleeing from police. The appellate court reversed all convictions and remanded for new trial, finding insufficient evidence for two convictions and prejudicial prose
• Katos v. Robert B. Cushing, D.D.S. & Robert B. Cushing, D.D.S., P.A.
  601 So. 2d 612· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-06-23 ·cited 47×·via Harmful Error Standard
  The court affirmed a dental malpractice judgment, finding no harmful error in evidentiary rulings because excluded evidence was cumulative and admitted testimony was not prejudicial, and the jury verdict was supported by competent evidence.
• Carlyle Francis Dempsey v. Shell OIL Co.
  589 So. 2d 373· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-11-13 ·cited 47×
  Dempsey appeals an adverse judgment in a personal injury case involving a nighttime pedestrian-vehicle collision. The appellate court reverses due to three evidentiary errors: improper impeachment on a collateral matter, improper restriction of expert cross-examination on headlig
• Olga Romani, M.D. v. State
  542 So. 2d 984· Fla.· 1989-04-27 ·cited 47×
  The court held that Florida law requires independent evidence to establish a conspiracy before admitting coconspirator hearsay statements, rejecting the federal approach that allows hearsay for preliminary determinations. However, the court found the error harmless as to the cons
• Matire v. Louie Wainwright
  811 F.2d 1430· 11th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 47×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that appellate counsel's failure to raise the Fifth Amendment issue regarding improper comments on the defendant's post-arrest silence constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Straight v. Louie L. Wainwright
  422 So. 2d 827· Fla.· 1982-09-14 ·cited 47×
  Ronald Straight, a death row inmate, sought habeas corpus relief and appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion, raising claims of ineffective assistance from both appellate and trial counsel, as well as constitutional challenges to jury instructions on mitigatin
• Johnson v. Trueblood
  629 F.2d 287· 3d Cir.· 1980-07-31 ·cited 47×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend their pleadings to include claims arising from the foreclosure of the shopping center, and that the jury instruction regarding the business judgment rule was also erroneous under Delaware law.
• Major Leo D. Doyle v. The United States
  599 F.2d 984· Ct. Cl.· 1979-05-16 ·cited 47×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  The absence of Reservists on selection boards was harmless error because reconstituted boards, considering the same officers and standards, also did not select the plaintiffs.
• United States v. Smith
  D.D.C.· 1976-12-17 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the failure to suppress identifications was not ineffective assistance of counsel, but the trial court erred in not applying Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a) to Gartrell's impeachment by prior conviction.
• United States v. COX
  464 F.2d 937· 6th Cir.· 1972-07-18 ·cited 47×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  A guilty plea, even if intelligent and voluntary, generally waives non-jurisdictional defects, and a procedure allowing appeal on such grounds after a guilty plea is inconsistent with legal principles and will not be countenanced.
• Bustamante v. Eyman
  456 F.2d 269· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-07 ·cited 47×·via Harmless Error Rule (Chapman V. California)
  The dissenting judge would hold that the replay of electronically recorded instructions in the defendant's absence was not an error of constitutional dimension and, even if it were, it was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Hazuri v. State
  91 So. 3d 836· Fla.· 2012-05-31 ·cited 46×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that when a jury requests trial transcripts during deliberations, the trial court must inform the jury of its right to request a read-back of testimony under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410, even if the jury does not use the specific term "
• Reed v. State
  783 So. 2d 1192· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-05-01 ·cited 46×
  Loretta Reed appeals her conviction for aggravated child abuse, challenging the trial court's refusal to allow the jury to view the victim's current injuries and arguing the jury instruction on 'malice' was erroneous. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, ho
• Harrelson v. State
  616 So. 2d 128· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-03-24 ·cited 46×
  Donald Harrelson appeals the denial of his motion to correct his sentence for two counts of sexual battery. The court affirms the denial of most claims but reverses and remands regarding the scoring of victim injury points on the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, requiring the tr
• United States v. Arvanitis
  902 F.2d 489· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-03 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that a mere inaccurate prediction of sentencing by counsel does not constitute ineffective assistance, but remanded restitution orders where legal fees were improperly included or where causation of loss was not established.
• Kennedy v. Louie L. Wainwright
  483 So. 2d 424· Fla.· 1986-02-12 ·cited 46×
  Edward Kennedy, a death row inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief challenging his capital convictions and death sentences on grounds that prospective jurors opposed to capital punishment were unconstitutionally excluded from his jury, and that he received ineffective assist
• United States ex rel. Raymond Burke v. Greer
  756 F.2d 1295· 7th Cir.· 1985-03-13 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the prosecutor's repeated indirect references to the defendants' failure to testify were constitutionally impermissible and not harmless error, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Udey
  748 F.2d 1231· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-07 ·cited 46×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to convict Edwin Udey of harboring or conspiring to harbor a fugitive, as the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Udey knew of the federal warrant or affirmatively cooperated in the conspiracy.
• Sullivan v. State OF Ala.
  666 F.2d 478· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the admission of pre-Miranda statements was constitutional as they were voluntary, and post-Miranda statements were admissible due to a valid waiver, and prosecutorial comment on silence was harmless error.
• United States v. Wilkins
  659 F.2d 769· 7th Cir.· 1981-09-11 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Doctrine
  The court affirmed the convictions of all three defendants, finding no reversible error in the suppression rulings, evidentiary decisions, prosecutorial comments, or sufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Shavers
  615 F.2d 266· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the prosecutor's impeachment of the defendant with his prior silence and the admission of prejudicial extrinsic evidence constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Pasquale Perrotta
  553 F.2d 247· 1st Cir.· 1977-04-25 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial judge erred by failing to poll the jury about potentially prejudicial newspaper publicity, requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• United States v. McCLAIN
  531 F.2d 431· 9th Cir.· 1976-02-13 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's car was permissible under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, and that while the admission of hearsay evidence to show predisposition was error, it was harmless.
• Blackburn v. Armond Cross
  510 F.2d 1014· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-02 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Wingate principle, which prohibits the state from relitigating any issue determined in a prior prosecution, should be applied retroactively to cases that became final before Wingate was decided.
• United States v. Harpel
  493 F.2d 346· 10th Cir.· 1974-03-12 ·cited 46×
  The court held that using a telephone extension without authorization or consent to surreptitiously record a private conversation is not considered use 'in the ordinary course of business' and thus constitutes an unlawful interception under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1)(c).
• United States v. Henson
  486 F.2d 1292· D.C. Cir.· 1973-10-17 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the omission of an immediate cautionary instruction regarding the limited purpose for admitting evidence of prior convictions was not harmless error.