Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Herve Jean-Mary v. State
  678 So. 2d 928· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-09-04 ·cited 12×
  Jean-Mary was convicted of burglary after a jury trial where the trial court improperly prevented cross-examination of a key state witness about her recently dismissed criminal charges. The appellate court reversed, finding that the defense was entitled to expose the witness's po
• Brown v. State
  676 So. 2d 1034· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-06-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to a new trial because he was present during jury selection and any noncompliance with rules regarding presence during juror challenges was harmless.
• Deck v. State
  653 So. 2d 435· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-03-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of an investigative interview after the suspect's equivocal invocation of his right to remain silent violated the Florida Constitution, and this error was not harmless.
• Bolin v. State
  650 So. 2d 19· Fla.· 1995-02-09 ·cited 12×
  Oscar Ray Bolin was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court erred in admitting spousal communications that were protected by the marital privilege and in admitting col
• Archibald v. State
  646 So. 2d 298· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-12-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred by reclassifying the felony and imposing a life sentence under the violent habitual offender statute, as this substantially altered the punishment.
• Manning Coney v. State
  643 So. 2d 654· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-10-05 ·cited 12×
  Manning Coney was convicted after trial testimony from a child victim presented via closed-circuit television. The appellate court reversed and remanded due to multiple trial errors: insufficient findings of fact for closed-circuit testimony, inadequate attorney-defendant communi
• Holmes v. State
  642 So. 2d 1387· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-07-01 ·cited 12×
  Robert Holmes appeals his convictions for attempted second-degree murder and arson of a dwelling. The court reverses both convictions, finding multiple trial errors including failure to conduct a Richardson hearing on discovery violations, refusal to instruct the jury on attempte
• Bolin v. State
  642 So. 2d 540· Fla.· 1994-04-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that taking a discovery deposition of a witness does not waive the spousal privilege, and admitting statements made by the defendant to his wife over objection was reversible error.
• Knickerbocker v. State
  619 So. 2d 18· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-05-13 ·cited 12×
  Sentences for life felonies cannot be enhanced under the habitual offender statute, but the failure to make required findings for enhancement is subject to harmless error analysis. Sentences for burglary and kidnapping may be enhanced.
• Mills v. Singletary
  606 So. 2d 622· Fla.· 1992-10-22 ·cited 12×
  Gregory Mills, a death row inmate, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, raising claims about inadequate harmless error analysis and the constitutionality of the felony-murder aggravator. The court denied the petition on procedural grounds, holding tha
• Wiley v. Puckett
  969 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1992-07-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Mississippi Supreme Court's prior affirmation of the death sentence, based on a vague aggravating circumstance without proper reweighing or harmless error analysis, violated the Eighth Amendment. The court vacated the district court's judgment and directed
• United States v. Hughes
  970 F.2d 227· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-16 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the jury selection, evidentiary rulings, or expert testimony.
• Lufkins v. Leapley
  965 F.2d 1477· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-07 ·cited 12×
  The admission of witness statements, even if their cross-examination was ineffective, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt because the defendant's confession and other corroborating evidence were overwhelming.
• Wilson v. State
  596 So. 2d 775· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-04-06 ·cited 12×
  Wilson was convicted of RICO violations, forgery, and uttering forged instruments. The appellate court reversed the RICO conviction because the state failed to establish a separate enterprise entity distinct from Wilson himself, but affirmed the forgery and uttering convictions.
• United States v. Molina
  952 F.2d 514· D.C. Cir.· 1992-01-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred by relying on impermissible factors for departure and by failing to adequately justify the extent of the departure.
• Aldret v. State
  592 So. 2d 264· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-12-03 ·cited 12×
  Joseph Aldret appeals his aggravated assault and simple assault convictions, challenging the trial court's denial of a peremptory challenge to remove a black juror and the imposition of costs without notice. The appellate court affirmed the State's standing to challenge discrimin
• Story v. State
  589 So. 2d 939· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-10-09 ·cited 12×
  Beverly Story was convicted of RICO violations, grand theft, and maintaining false citrus records arising from her fruit company transactions. The appellate court reversed her RICO and grand theft convictions, finding the trial court erred in excluding evidence that her employees
• Williams v. Withrow
  944 F.2d 284· 6th Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted the habeas corpus petition because the suspect's statements were involuntary due to police coercion and promises of leniency, and their admission was not harmless error.
• Jens Peter Hansen v. State
  585 So. 2d 1056· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-09-04 ·cited 12×
  Hansen appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and burglary, arguing the trial court made erroneous evidentiary rulings regarding his insanity defense. The court affirms the conviction and life sentence, finding the trial judge properly managed the admission of evidence an
• United States v. Rosalba Solivan
  937 F.2d 1146· 6th Cir.· 1991-07-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prosecutor's remarks during closing argument, which appealed to the jury's emotions and prejudices regarding the drug problem, constituted reversible error because they deprived the defendant of a fair trial and were not cured by the subsequent admonition.
• United States v. Williams
  935 F.2d 1531· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's jury instruction, which omitted the essential element of specific intent to defraud, constituted reversible error because it created a mandatory presumption and was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Henthorn
  931 F.2d 29· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the defendant's discovery request for impeachment material in testifying officers' personnel files without an in camera review.
• United States v. Rubio-Villareal
  927 F.2d 1495· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support conspiracy convictions and that a jury instruction regarding knowledge impermissibly shifted the burden of proof, requiring reversal and a new trial for possession charges.
• United States v. Castillo
  924 F.2d 1227· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the expert testimony was improperly admitted and its misuse in summation prejudiced the jury, requiring reversal of the firearm conviction. The court also held that the sentencing enhancement for an 'official victim' was based on an inadequate factual finding.
• Persinger v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
  920 F.2d 1185· 4th Cir.· 1990-12-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the district judge did not abuse his discretion in excluding expert testimony, he erred in granting JNOV because the plaintiff was prejudiced by the late exclusion of evidence. The court affirmed the grant of a new trial.
• Larson v. Tansy
  911 F.2d 392· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 12×
  A defendant has a constitutional right to be present at jury instructions, closing arguments, and the rendering of the verdict, and this right cannot be waived by counsel without the defendant's explicit consent, especially when the defendant is in custody.
• Desmond Broderick v. State
  564 So. 2d 622· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-08-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of impermissible collateral crime evidence was not harmless error and required reversal, and that the habitual offender statute does not violate due process by allowing consideration of uncounseled prior convictions.
• Rodriguez v. Young
  906 F.2d 1153· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-11 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that while counsel's failure to move for suppression of identification testimony was objectively unreasonable, the identification was sufficiently reliable to be admissible, and there was no miscarriage of justi
• United States v. Blair
  902 F.2d 323· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a district court's failure to inform a defendant of the possibility of supervised release before accepting a guilty plea violates Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 and affects substantial rights, requiring vacatur of the plea and sentence.
• Morris v. State
  557 So. 2d 27· Fla.· 1990-02-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that any errors in the guilt phase were harmless and the sentence should be reduced to life imprisonment.
• Coppola v. Powell
  878 F.2d 1562· 1st Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·cited 12×
  The admission of a prearrest statement, where the suspect refused to confess and indicated awareness of his right to remain silent, into the prosecution's case in chief unconstitutionally burdened the suspect's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• United States v. Dotson
  871 F.2d 1318· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, finding that the jury instructions given were adequate and that the evidence supported the jury's findings.
• United States v. Hernandez
  873 F.2d 516· 2d Cir.· 1989-04-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while proceeding with jury selection in the defendant's absence was initially permissible, the district court erred by failing to conduct a sufficient inquiry into the defendant's explanation for his absence upon his return, requiring a remand for further fact
• Stringer v. Jackson
  862 F.2d 1108· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of prosecutorial misconduct, erroneous jury instructions, and ineffective assistance of counsel were either procedurally barred or without merit, affirming the denial of the writ of habeas corpus.
• Sanders v. Lane
  861 F.2d 1033· 7th Cir.· 1988-11-10 ·cited 12×
  A judicial order prohibiting attorney-client communication during a trial recess violates the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, but such a violation is subject to harmless error analysis if it does not contaminate the entire proceeding.
• In re Woosley v. Woosley
  855 F.2d 687· 10th Cir.· 1988-08-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that failure to specify the appealing party in the notice of appeal, as required by Fed.R.App.P. 3(c), is a jurisdictional bar that mandates dismissal.
• Micky Dale Davis v. State
  527 So. 2d 962· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-07-07 ·cited 12×
  Micky Davis was convicted of attempted lewd and lascivious assault and lewd and lascivious assault upon his fourteen-year-old daughter based on her testimony. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court improperly restricted cross-exami
• United States v. Gert Albertus Theron
  849 F.2d 477· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's failure to properly advise the defendant of his right to withdraw his guilty plea if the court did not accept the sentencing recommendation constituted a violation of Rule 11(e)(2) that was not harmless error.
• United States v. Hornung
  848 F.2d 1040· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a presumptively prejudicial juror contact was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the jury instructions did not impermissibly amend the indictment.
• Cordova v. Lynaugh
  838 F.2d 764· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court violated the defendant's due process rights by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of murder in a capital case when the evidence could have supported such a verdict.
• Rosario v. Kuhlman
  839 F.2d 918· 2d Cir.· 1988-02-12 ·cited 12×
  The trial court's refusal to admit impeaching testimony regarding the sole identifying witness's presence at the crime scene constituted a constitutional error, as it deprived the defendant of his due process right to present a defense.
• United States v. Rubin
  836 F.2d 1096· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination of a witness or in quashing a subpoena for foreign bank records, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and sentence.
• A.C.S. v. State
  518 So. 2d 457· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-01-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a discovery deposition cannot be used as substantive evidence in a criminal trial.
• United States v. Sherman
  821 F.2d 1337· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that conducting a jury instruction conference in the defendant's absence was not plain error, as it constituted a conference on a question of law. The court also found no reversible error in the denial of a motion to elect possession counts or in the restriction of
• United States v. Winfield Tucker
  820 F.2d 234· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant for passing and possessing counterfeit bills, and that while one prosecutorial statement was improper, it did not deny the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Dempewolf
  817 F.2d 1318· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in limiting cross-examination, refusing an addict-informer instruction, admitting certain evidence, denying severance, or finding the evidence sufficient to convict.
• Boles v. Foltz
  816 F.2d 1132· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-24 ·cited 12×
  A request for counsel at arraignment invokes the Fifth Amendment right to counsel, and subsequent police-initiated interrogation on unrelated offenses violates the rule established in Edwards v. Arizona.
• United States v. Neuroth
  809 F.2d 339· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an "on or about" jury instruction is not per se prohibited when a defendant presents an alibi defense for a specific date, and any error in giving such an instruction is subject to harmless error analysis.
• Tuggle v. Seabold
  806 F.2d 87· 6th Cir.· 1986-11-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted habeas corpus relief based on a due process violation, but remanded for a determination of whether the error was harmless.
• Traylor v. State
  498 So. 2d 1297· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-11-14 ·cited 12×
  John Edward Traylor was convicted of second-degree murder in the stabbing death of Tina Nagy. He appealed, challenging the admissibility of confessions obtained during police interrogation on grounds that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated. The court held that whil