Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Smith v. Hooligan's PUB & Oyster BAR, Ltd.
  753 So. 2d 596· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-02-16 ·cited 16×
  The Smith family appealed a wrongful death judgment against a bar for negligent security after their son was killed in an altercation outside the establishment. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court improperly admitted character evidence re
• Foburg v. State
  744 So. 2d 1175· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-11-03 ·cited 16×
  Richard Foburg was convicted of child sexual abuse and contributing to the delinquency of minors. The Florida appellate court reversed his convictions, holding that the trial court improperly admitted Williams rule evidence (prior bad acts) that was based solely on propensity rat
• Mason v. State
  719 So. 2d 304· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-06-24 ·cited 16×
  Douglas Mason was convicted of attempted burglary after the trial court refused to require the prosecution to read a sentence from Mason's police statement that suggested he wanted to leave the scene because he thought the conduct was wrong. The appellate court reversed, finding
• Golden v. State
  688 So. 2d 419· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-02-20 ·cited 16×
  Frank Golden, Jr. appealed his convictions for burglary, grand theft, and dealing in stolen property. The Florida appellate court affirmed the burglary and dealing in stolen property convictions but reversed and remanded the grand theft conviction due to improper multiple adjudic
• Smith v. State
  678 So. 2d 1374· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-09-04 ·cited 16×
  Joel Vincent Smith was convicted of attempted second-degree murder with a firearm and cocaine possession with intent to sell. The appellate court reversed his upward departure sentence due to an improperly calculated sentencing scoresheet and because the trial court's reliance on
• McARTHUR v. State
  671 So. 2d 867· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-04-17 ·cited 16×
  Allen McArthur was convicted of sexual battery, aggravated battery, and false imprisonment. The appellate court reversed the sexual battery conviction due to the state's mid-trial disclosure of the victim's torn shorts, which contradicted the misleading lab report provided during
• Taylor v. State
  658 So. 2d 173· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-07-21 ·cited 16×
• Morris v. State
  658 So. 2d 155· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-07-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in failing to include unarmed robbery on the verdict form because the error was invited and harmless, but did err in ordering restitution when all stolen property was recovered.
• Bolin v. State
  650 So. 2d 21· Fla.· 1995-02-09 ·cited 16×
  Oscar Ray Bolin was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for killing Stephanie Collins. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction and remanded for a new trial because evidence protected by the spousal privilege was improperly admitted at trial, and the
• Hitchcock v. State
  636 So. 2d 572· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-05-11 ·cited 16×
  Timothy Hitchcock was convicted of six counts of indecent assault on his minor stepson based primarily on the victim's testimony. The appellate court reversed the conviction because the trial court erred in admitting expert testimony that improperly bolstered the victim's credibi
• Sgroi v. State
  634 So. 2d 280· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-03-30 ·cited 16×
  Appellant was convicted of burglary of a dwelling and aggravated battery. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the prosecutor made an impermissible comment on appellant's failure to testify in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights,
• George v. Mann
  622 So. 2d 151· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-08-10 ·cited 16×
  In this personal injury appeal, the Third District reversed a jury verdict for defendants in a dog-bite and collision case because defense counsel's closing argument improperly accused the plaintiff of lying, fraud, and discovery violations, fatally compromising the plaintiff's r
• Roark v. State
  620 So. 2d 237· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-06-22 ·cited 16×
  Roark was convicted of sexual battery and lewd and lascivious assault against two minor victims, his nieces. The appellate court reversed because the trial court erred in failing to sever the counts involving different victims, as the offenses were not connected in an "episodic s
• Newton Carlton Slawson v. State
  619 So. 2d 255· Fla.· 1993-04-01 ·cited 16×
  Newton Slawson was convicted of four counts of first-degree murder and one count of killing an unborn child in connection with the deaths of the Wood family on April 11, 1989. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed all convictions and four death sentences, rejecting Slawson's argumen
• Spriggs v. State
  615 So. 2d 828· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-03-17 ·cited 16×
  A defendant who expressly agreed to be sentenced as a habitual felony offender (HFO) under a plea agreement challenges his sentence, arguing the trial court failed to make specific factual findings required by statute. The Fourth District holds that a defendant may knowingly and
• Valdez v. State
  613 So. 2d 916· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-01-13 ·cited 16×
  Ernesto Valdez appeals his conviction for multiple offenses including aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and drug possession. The Florida appellate court reversed the conviction due to cumulative prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument, holding that three im
• Meyer v. Singletary
  610 So. 2d 1329· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-12-23 ·cited 16×
  Meyer, convicted of kidnapping, robbery, and attempted robbery, challenged his conviction via habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The court found that appellate counsel failed to raise meritorious claims regarding trial court violations of
• Taylor v. State
  601 So. 2d 1304· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-07-08 ·cited 16×
  Robert Taylor was convicted of aggravated battery of a pregnant woman but the trial court erred by excluding evidence of statements made to Taylor regarding the victim's inability to become pregnant. Because Taylor's knowledge of the pregnancy was an element the state had to prov
• Caton v. State
  597 So. 2d 412· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-04-22 ·cited 16×
  James Catón was convicted of battery on a booking officer at a county jail, but the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed because the trial judge improperly restricted cross-examination intended to show the officer's bias by revealing his potential motive to pursue cha
• Massey v. State
  589 So. 2d 336· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-10-31 ·cited 16×
  James Massey appealed his sentence as a habitual violent felony offender, challenging the state's failure to serve written notice of its intent to seek enhancement as required by Florida Statutes § 775.084(3)(b). The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that while wri
• United States v. Blake
  941 F.2d 334· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the indictment's joinder of offenses was proper, certain extrinsic evidence was admissible, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Bruno F. Sinigaglio
  942 F.2d 581· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court's voir dire questions were insufficient to negate the presumption of prejudice arising from the government's failure to comply with 26 U.S.C. § 6103(h)(5).
• Ulrick Omelus v. State
  584 So. 2d 563· Fla.· 1991-06-13 ·cited 16×
  Ulrick Omelus was convicted of first-degree murder for hiring John Henry Jones to kill Willie Mitchell for life insurance proceeds. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction but vacated his death sentence and remanded for new sentencing because the trial court improperly
• Martinez v. Borg
  937 F.2d 422· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-25 ·cited 16×
  A jury instruction that fails to state all elements of aiding and abetting, specifically the intent to aid the principal's crime, constitutes constitutional error that is not harmless if the jury's findings do not necessarily include the omitted element.
• Billeaud v. State
  578 So. 2d 343· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-04-04 ·cited 16×
  Christopher Billeaud appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and armed burglary, challenging the trial court's death qualification of the jury and exclusion of evidence about his wife's alleged past extramarital affairs. The court affirmed the convictions, finding that wh
• United States v. Gibson
  928 F.2d 250· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress because the police acted in objectively reasonable reliance on a warrant issued by a neutral magistrate, and that the giving of a 'mere presence' jury instruction was harmless error. The court al
• Gore v. State
  573 So. 2d 87· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-01-02 ·cited 16×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a defendant's convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to exclude electronic media from the courtroom. The court found that conflicting expert testimony regarding the media's effect on
• Young v. Herring
  917 F.2d 858· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 16×
  The dissent argues that the majority misapplies the 'plain statement' rule from Harris v. Reed, improperly expanding federal habeas review by disregarding an adequate and independent state procedural ground.
• WAY v. Dugger
  568 So. 2d 1263· Fla.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 16×
  Fred Lewis Way was convicted of murder for killing his wife and daughter and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction but vacated his death sentence due to improper jury instructions in the penalty phase that failed to inform the jury it could conside
• Savage v. Estelle
  908 F.2d 508· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-16 ·cited 16×
  A trial court may permissibly deny a criminal defendant the right to represent himself if a severe speech impediment renders him unable to abide by the rules of courtroom procedure and communicate effectively with the jury.
• United States v. Nino C. Duarte
  901 F.2d 1498· 9th Cir.· 1990-04-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a district court may consider letters regarding a defendant's character and background when determining a sentence within the applicable Sentencing Guideline range, and erred in concluding it must ignore them.
• United States v. Vizcarra-Porras
  889 F.2d 1435· 1st Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to disclose the confidential informant's identity and compel testimony, nor did it err in its evidentiary rulings or find reversible error in the prosecutor's closing argument.
• Savino v. State
  555 So. 2d 1237· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-11-08 ·cited 16×
  Joseph Savino appeals his third-degree murder conviction for the death of his stepson. The court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding multiple trial errors: (1) unconstitutional deprivation of Savino's right to be present during witness testimony and jury instruction, (2
• The United States v. DiLORETO
  888 F.2d 996· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-07 ·cited 16×
  The court's prior decisions, particularly Swinehart, may have established a per se reversal rule for certain prosecutorial misconduct, but this conflicts with Supreme Court precedent requiring a prejudice analysis.
• Fidel Cabral v. State
  550 So. 2d 46· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-08-22 ·cited 16×
  Conviction reversed because the State presented only non-expert opinion that a substance was cocaine without scientific proof, and the prosecutor elicited prejudicial testimony that the arrest location was known for drug activity, which unduly prejudiced the jury on insufficient
• United States v. Zayas
  876 F.2d 1057· 1st Cir.· 1989-06-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the jury empanelment was not a pretext to violate the Speedy Trial Act, any error regarding the Fifth Amendment was harmless, and the sentencing was correct.
• United States v. Ibukun O. Mayomi
  873 F.2d 1049· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the detention of the defendant's mail for a period of forty-eight hours over a weekend for a canine sniff test was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and that limiting cross-examination regarding the informant's identity and prior investigations was not an
• Alton Waye v. Townley
  871 F.2d 18· 4th Cir.· 1989-03-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice from his counsel's failure to object to a jury instruction, thus the procedural bar foreclosed review of the Sandstrom violation.
• United States v. Detrich
  865 F.2d 17· 2d Cir.· 1988-12-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding Dawood Nusraty's statement that he was getting married, as it was not hearsay when offered to show the defendant's state of mind and was relevant to the defense.
• United States v. Partida-Parra
  859 F.2d 629· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court's error in vacating a guilty plea was harmless because the government was no longer bound by the plea agreement and subsequent prosecutions were not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Lanigan v. Maloney
  853 F.2d 40· 1st Cir.· 1988-08-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court properly found a constitutional violation in the jury's reasonable doubt instructions and that the claim was not procedurally barred.
• King v. Lynaugh
  850 F.2d 1055· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-27 ·cited 16×
  The Constitution does not require capital murder defendants to question prospective jurors about their understanding of parole law, as this falls within the trial court's discretion and is not a matter of constitutional sensitivity.
• United States v. Reifsteck
  841 F.2d 701· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court's error in reserving ruling on a motion for judgment of acquittal is harmless if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, was sufficient to permit submission of the case to the jury. The court also held that the re
• Mauricio v. Duckworth
  840 F.2d 454· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-10 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the State's knowing failure to disclose the identity of an alibi rebuttal witness violated due process and was not harmless error.
• White v. Dugger
  523 So. 2d 140· Fla.· 1988-01-28 ·cited 16×
  William White challenges his death sentence for first-degree murder on habeas corpus, arguing that jury instructions improperly limited consideration of mitigating circumstances to those enumerated in the sentencing statute. The Florida Supreme Court rejects his claim, finding an
• Otto Graham v. Wilson
  828 F.2d 656· 10th Cir.· 1987-09-17 ·cited 16×
  The federal court held that while prosecutorial error occurred by using perjured testimony, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming corroborating evidence. The district court's grant of habeas corpus was therefore vacated.
• Morgan v. State
  515 So. 2d 975· Fla.· 1987-08-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to consider nonstatutory mitigating circumstances during sentencing, as required by Hitchcock v. Dugger, necessitates a new sentencing proceeding.
• Amadeo v. Kemp
  816 F.2d 1502· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the introduction of 'other crimes' evidence did not deny the petitioner a fair trial, and the petitioner failed to establish sufficient cause to excuse his procedural default in challenging jury composition.
• Brown v. State
  502 So. 2d 1293· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-02-19 ·cited 16×
  Tommy Brown appealed his escape conviction sentence, challenging the trial court's improper inclusion of 24 points for 'legal constraint' in calculating his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The appellate court held that being arrested and in custody—the basis for the escape char
• Long v. State
  494 So. 2d 213· Fla.· 1986-09-18 ·cited 16×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question of great public importance regarding whether prosecutorial comments on a defendant's failure to testify are subject to harmless error analysis rather than the per se reversal rule. The Court affirmed its recent DiGuilio deci