Harmless Error Analysis

4,402 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Oliver v. State
  707 So. 2d 771· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-01-09 ·cited 18×
  Oscar L. Oliver appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia, challenging the trial court's refusal to give special jury instructions on the element of guilty knowledge. The court reverses, holding that following the Florida Supreme Court's decision in
• Armad Johnson v. State
  695 So. 2d 787· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-05-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on a necessarily lesser-included offense of sexual battery, but affirmed the upward departure sentence for armed robbery.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Miller
  688 So. 2d 935· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-11-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a motion for rehearing is not authorized following an order denying a motion for new trial, and therefore the trial court lacked jurisdiction to vacate its prior order denying the motion for a new trial.
• Chadwick v. State
  680 So. 2d 567· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-08-07 ·cited 18×
  Steven Chadwick was convicted of battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence. The appellate court reversed because the trial court improperly excluded evidence of the officers' bias—specifically, that Chadwick had threatened to sue them and they were s
• Carlton Willis v. State
  669 So. 2d 1090· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-03-13 ·cited 18×
  Carlton Willis was convicted of robbery based primarily on the victim's identification, which contained significant inconsistencies regarding the assailant's height. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that a police officer's improper
• IN the Interest OF R.L.R.
  647 So. 2d 251· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-11-28 ·cited 18×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a trial court's adjudication of dependency and foster care placement for three children, holding that the trial court failed to make sufficient specific findings of fact as required by the Florida Evidence Code before admitting hearsay testimony
• Pettit v. State
  612 So. 2d 1381· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-12-11 ·cited 18×
  William Russell Pettit appeals his convictions for sexual battery, residential burglary, armed robbery, and battery, challenging the trial court's exclusion of DNA evidence and its evidentiary rulings regarding tattoo evidence. The state cross-appeals the DNA exclusion order. The
• United States v. Zickert
  955 F.2d 665· 11th Cir.· 1992-02-24 ·cited 18×
  The Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court's denial of a defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea in a federal drug importation case, holding that the court violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(e)(2) by failing to inform the defendant that he had no right to w
• Johnson v. State
  595 So. 2d 132· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-02-13 ·cited 18×
  Mary Johnson appealed her cocaine possession conviction, which followed a nolo contendere plea with reserved appellate rights challenging the denial of a suppression motion. The Florida appellate court held that while probable cause existed for her arrest, the trial court reversi
• Lubanski v. Coleco Indus., Inc.
  929 F.2d 42· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding State Trooper Benanti's report, as any error was harmless due to the substance being presented through oral testimony, and affirmed the directed verdict on the noise issue due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Lonedog
  929 F.2d 568· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in limiting cross-examination or in its rulings on alleged prosecutorial misconduct, and that any errors were harmless.
• Barnes v. State
  576 So. 2d 439· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-03-27 ·cited 18×
  Bobby Kennedy Barnes appeals his conviction for aggravated battery on the grounds that a detective testified to the victim's prior consistent statement, which improperly bolstered the victim's trial testimony. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded because the
• Levis Leon Aldridge v. Dugger
  925 F.2d 1320· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions improperly limited the jury's consideration of nonstatutory mitigating circumstances, violating Hitchcock v. Dugger, and that this error was not harmless.
• Parker v. State
  570 So. 2d 1053· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-11-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to conduct an inquiry into the defendant's pro se motion to discharge appointed counsel was harmless error, and the split sentence imposed did not violate double jeopardy.
• United States v. Magana-Olvera
  917 F.2d 401· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Ricky Zimmerle's hearsay statements were inadmissible under Rule 804(b)(3) and violated the Sixth Amendment, but the conspiracy conviction was supported by sufficient independent evidence, while the firearms conviction was not.
• United States v. Alvaro Julio Echavarria-Olarte
  904 F.2d 1391· 9th Cir.· 1990-06-07 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, finding that the jury selection process was proper, the wiretap evidence was admissible, and the admission of expert testimony on the Medellin Cartel, while potentially prejudicial, constituted harmless error due to the overwhelming
• Martinez v. Sullivan
  881 F.2d 921· 10th Cir.· 1989-08-04 ·cited 18×
  The prosecution's failure to utilize the Uniform Act to secure an out-of-state witness, coupled with the witness's history of unreliability, meant the witness was not legally "unavailable" and their prior testimony should not have been admitted, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Neavill
  868 F.2d 1000· 8th Cir.· 1989-03-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err by refusing to instruct the jury on the defendant's disposition if found not guilty by reason of insanity.
• Verni v. State
  536 So. 2d 1162· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-12-30 ·cited 18×
  Robert Verni appeals his convictions and sentences for trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. The appellate court affirmed the trafficking conviction but reversed the conspiracy conviction due to a Bruton violation in admitting an unconfronted codefendant's
• United States v. Lail
  846 F.2d 1299· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that evidence of an extrinsic bank robbery was improperly admitted under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) because the dissimilarities between the crimes did not establish a modus operandi for identity purposes. The error was not harmless.
• Green v. ARN
  839 F.2d 300· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner's release from custody and parole did not moot her habeas corpus action.
• United States v. Gordon
  829 F.2d 119· D.C. Cir.· 1987-09-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a defendant's waiver of the right to be present at jury selection can be knowing and intelligent even if it occurs through counsel and not in open court, and that the advice of counsel need not meet the highest standards.
• Woratzeck v. Ricketts
  820 F.2d 1450· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the claim of right defense is eliminated for robbery by statute and that no theft instruction was warranted due to lack of supporting evidence.
• Cook v. Foltz
  814 F.2d 1109· 6th Cir.· 1987-03-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that ineffective assistance of counsel can constitute cause for a procedural default, but the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance was meritless.
• United States v. Johnson
  812 F.2d 1329· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of an incriminating statement made after the defendant invoked his right to counsel was not harmless error.
• United States v. Miliet
  804 F.2d 853· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting co-conspirator statements, in its cross-examination rulings, or in denying a new trial motion, affirming the convictions.
• Davis v. State
  493 So. 2d 11· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-07-15 ·cited 18×
  Martin Davis appealed his armed robbery and attempted first-degree murder convictions, arguing that the trial court erred by admitting police detective testimony that inescapably suggested a non-testifying witness identified the getaway vehicle. The appellate court agreed, findin
• United States v. Schwartz
  790 F.2d 1059· 3d Cir.· 1986-05-21 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts was an abuse of discretion, as its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Guichard
  779 F.2d 1139· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court's failure to explicitly inform the defendant of his right to confront witnesses did not constitute reversible error, as the core concerns of Rule 11 were met and the error was harmless.
• Holland v. Attorney General of New Jersey
  777 F.2d 150· 3d Cir.· 1985-11-22 ·cited 18×
  The admission of a co-defendant's confession implicating the defendant, even if deemed harmless error by state courts, violates the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and requires reversal unless the prosecution proves harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Straight v. Louie L. Wainwright
  772 F.2d 674· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred or without merit, and affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• United States v. Davis
  766 F.2d 1452· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that admitting evidence of co-conspirator guilty pleas, even without a limiting instruction, was not plain error, and that a potential conflict of interest arising from defense counsel's prior representation of a government witness was harmless.
• United States v. Littlefield
  752 F.2d 1429· 9th Cir.· 1985-02-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district judge's finding that a magazine article did not influence the jury's verdict was not clearly erroneous, and thus the majority's reversal was improper.
• Anderson v. Smith
  751 F.2d 96· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of the defendant's videotaped confession, obtained after he invoked his right to remain silent, violated Miranda v. Arizona and its progeny, and was not harmless error.
• United States v. Williams
  739 F.2d 297· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's failure to call a witness and the admission of testimony about the defendant's nickname 'Fast Eddie' constituted reversible error.
• In re the Petition of Edwin Grant Hamilton
  721 F.2d 1189· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a jury instruction creating a presumption of intent, unconstitutional under Sandstrom v. Montana, cannot be harmless error if criminal intent was a disputed issue at trial.
• Prudence F. Williams v. State
  441 So. 2d 653· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-10-04 ·cited 18×
  Prudence Williams appeals her first-degree grand theft conviction based on the denial of her motion to suppress her confession. The Florida appellate court reversed the conviction and suppressed the confession, finding that law enforcement officers extracted it through lies, thre
• United States v. Fatimah Bice-Bey
  701 F.2d 1086· 4th Cir.· 1983-02-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of prior transactions evidence was permissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that using credit card account numbers over the phone constitutes a violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1644(a).
• Anderson v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
  696 F.2d 296· 4th Cir.· 1982-12-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial judge's comments on admittedly perjured testimony did not exceed permissible bounds, even under extreme provocation.
• United States v. Nicodemo Scarfo
  685 F.2d 842· 3d Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of illegally obtained evidence, specifically a telephone list, could have influenced the jury's verdict and was not harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Bartley Burns and Lawrence Kelly
  683 F.2d 1056· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a judge's ex parte communication with the jury during deliberations, violating Rule 43(a), requires reversal of the affected conviction, but other convictions may stand if unaffected.
• Drake v. Zant
  449 U.S. 999· U.S.· 1980-11-17 ·cited 18×
• Charles v. Anderson
  610 F.2d 417· 6th Cir.· 1979-12-04 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge believes the prosecutor's question about the defendant's inconsistent statements did not violate the Fifth Amendment.
• Cooper v. Campbell
  597 F.2d 628· 8th Cir.· 1979-04-25 ·cited 18×
  The failure to instruct the jury on manslaughter, when evidence supported it, constituted a due process violation cognizable in habeas corpus, as it removed the issue of malice from the jury's consideration.
• Wood v. Superintendent Robert F. Zahradnick
  578 F.2d 980· 4th Cir.· 1978-07-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a defense lawyer's failure to investigate potential insanity defenses, specifically by seeking a psychiatric evaluation, constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment.
• Blackwell v. Lou V. Brewer
  562 F.2d 596· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the state has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's absence from the courtroom during the interrogation of the jury amounted to harmless error, and that the issue of waiver was not resolved.
• Bond v. State OF Okla.
  546 F.2d 1369· 10th Cir.· 1976-12-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's confession, while constitutional error, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the overwhelming independent evidence of guilt. Other claims regarding improper conviction, denial of hearings, severance, and prejudicial ev
• United States v. Blackshire
  538 F.2d 569· 4th Cir.· 1976-03-31 ·cited 18×
• Potts v. Estelle
  529 F.2d 450· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the appellant's habeas petition, as the allegations regarding uncounseled misdemeanor convictions used for impeachment raised a valid constitutional claim.
• City OF ST. Petersburg v. Reed
  330 So. 2d 256· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-03-24 ·cited 18×
  Christopher Reed, a minor, recovered a $50,000 jury verdict against the City of St. Petersburg and Officer Begerow after being shot in the leg during an arrest. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court erred in admitting a city police order limiting use of deadl