Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Watt v. State
  31 So. 3d 238· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-03-17 ·cited 5×
  Leon Watt appealed his conviction for carrying a concealed firearm, challenging the trial court's admission of a Department of Agriculture letter stating he had no concealed firearm license. The court held the letter was inadmissible hearsay but affirmed the conviction as harmles
• Mitchell v. State
  25 So. 3d 632· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-12-30 ·cited 5×
  Mitchell appeals his conviction for home invasion robbery and related crimes, challenging the trial court's admission of historical cell site location records obtained from his cellular phone provider. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirms, holding that historical cell site
• Cameshia Byrd v. BT Foods, Inc.
  26 So. 3d 600· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-12-02 ·cited 5×
  Cameshia Byrd sued her employer, Wendy's, for HIV discrimination after termination. The trial court admitted a 'no reasonable cause' determination letter from the EEOC into evidence, which the jury relied upon in finding for the employer. The Fourth District reversed, holding tha
• Javarous Dawson v. State
  20 So. 3d 1016· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-11-12 ·cited 5×
  The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed Dawson's first-degree murder conviction and affirmed his grand theft conviction, holding that the trial court erred by excluding testimony from a defense psychological expert without adequately considering less severe sanctions
• McKEOWN v. State
  16 So. 3d 247· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-08-19 ·cited 5×
  Marcia Rose McKeown appeals her felony DUI conviction, challenging the trial court's admission of the arresting officer's testimony that he arrests only about 50% of DUI suspects he investigates. The Fourth District Court of Appeal holds the testimony was irrelevant and improperl
• Bryant v. State
  17 So. 3d 713· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-06-03 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a lay witness's testimony that the defendant appeared fearful was admissible under section 90.701, Florida Statutes, and its exclusion was not harmless error.
• Antunes-Salgado v. State
  987 So. 2d 222· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-07-30 ·cited 5×
  Carlos Antunes-Salgado was convicted of trafficking and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine based largely on inadmissible hearsay statements from his codefendants. The court reversed because defense counsel was ineffective for conceding the admissibility of statements that were the
• Freddrick Hines v. State
  983 So. 2d 721· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-06-10 ·cited 5×
  Hines was convicted of robbery with a firearm based partly on evidence that he possessed a .357 revolver on March 21, 2002. After his conviction, Hines was tried and acquitted of possessing that same firearm as a convicted felon on that same date. The court reversed his robbery c
• Ventura v. State
  973 So. 2d 634· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-01-30 ·cited 5×
  Javier Ventura appeals his conviction for two counts of robbery with a weapon and his thirty-year sentence as a prison releasee reoffender. The court affirmed, finding that although a detective improperly commented on Ventura's silence, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable
• Ross v. State
  993 So. 2d 1026· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-01-23 ·cited 5×
  Gregory Ross was convicted by jury of aggravated battery and armed kidnapping and sentenced to concurrent 30-year terms as a habitual felony offender. On appeal, Ross challenged the trial court's admission of a detective's testimony regarding a victim's out-of-court identificatio
• Jackson v. State
  961 So. 2d 1104· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-08-03 ·cited 5×
  Jimmy Douglas Jackson was convicted of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon for stabbing Bryan Simmons. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court improperly admitted an eyewitness's prior police statement as
• Shrader v. State
  962 So. 2d 369· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-07-25 ·cited 5×
  The court held that while one question in the grand jury testimony should have been redacted as improper, the error was harmless, and the trial court did not err in refusing to redact other portions of the testimony.
• Bloodsaw v. State
  949 So. 2d 1119· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-02-21 ·cited 5×
  Derrick Bloodsaw appeals his conviction for burglary, arguing the trial court failed to renew its offer of counsel at the start of trial as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.111(d)(5). The appellate court affirms, finding that any failure to renew the offer was har
• Kishaune Lynch v. State
  925 So. 2d 444· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-04-07 ·cited 5×
  Lynch appealed his sexual battery conviction, arguing the trial court failed to conduct a Richardson hearing when the State failed to disclose a defendant statement. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the undisclosed statement that Lynch called the
• Finklea v. State
  920 So. 2d 156· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-02-03 ·cited 5×
  Marcella Finklea appealed her conviction for drug possession, arguing the trial court erred by giving a partial jury instruction on the definition of possession that omitted the knowledge requirement. The court agreed and reversed for a new trial, holding that incomplete reinstru
• Cullen v. State
  920 So. 2d 1155· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-02-01 ·cited 5×
  Defendant's conviction for robbery with a deadly weapon was reversed because the trial court erred in limiting impeachment of a key witness who had opened the door to prior conviction evidence by falsely claiming he had never been in trouble.
• Weaver v. State
  916 So. 2d 895· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-11-16 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a jury instruction on a form of battery not alleged in the information, even if not objected to at trial, constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• Wilson v. State
  880 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-09-09 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the prosecution's improper cross-examination questions, while erroneous, constituted harmless error and did not warrant reversal.
• Collier v. State
  857 So. 2d 943· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-10-15 ·cited 5×
  Marion Collier appeals his commitment as a sexually violent predator under Florida's Jimmy Ryce Act, challenging the admissibility of the SVR-20 risk assessment tool used by expert witnesses. The court holds that the State failed to meet its burden of demonstrating the general sc
• Dickson v. State
  826 So. 2d 412· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-07-26 ·cited 5×
  Dickson appealed the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), claiming the trial court improperly scored victim injury points for sexual contact without ascertainable physical injury. The court reversed and remanded on
• Allister Jones v. State
  821 So. 2d 473· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-07-24 ·cited 5×
  Allister Jones was convicted of lewd assault and false imprisonment of a child under thirteen. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction, holding that the prosecutor impermissibly commented on Jones's right to remain silent during closing argument by referring t
• Wilson v. State
  798 So. 2d 836· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-10-31 ·cited 5×
• Roper v. State
  763 So. 2d 487· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-07-12 ·cited 5×
  Michael Roper appeals his convictions for felony cocaine possession, drug paraphernalia possession, and resisting arrest. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reverses and remands for a new trial, holding that the trial court erred in permitting the prosecutor to elicit testimony
• Abbott v. State
  744 So. 2d 578· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-11-12 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the jury instruction was erroneous because it failed to require the State to prove the defendant knew the illicit nature of the specific substance possessed, which was the appellant's defense.
• Camellon v. State
  741 So. 2d 1179· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-09-13 ·cited 5×
  Florida appellate court affirmed convictions for first-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder, rejecting challenges to voir dire and cross-examination limitations, but remanded for correction of the sentencing order to reflect the proper statutory violation.
• Domis v. State
  755 So. 2d 683· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-08-04 ·cited 5×
  David Domis appeals his conviction for seven counts of lewd and lascivious assault on a child, arguing that the trial court erred in allowing multiple references to alleged assaults on another child despite a pretrial ruling limiting such testimony, and failed to sever the multip
• Jones v. State
  715 So. 2d 378· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-08-19 ·cited 5×
• Garcia v. State
  694 So. 2d 815· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-05-14 ·cited 5×
  Francisco Garcia appeals his convictions for shooting into an occupied building and second-degree murder, challenging the trial court's failure to comply with Coney v. State procedures for establishing a valid waiver of his right to be physically present at sidebar during jury se
• Zecchino v. State
  691 So. 2d 1197· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-04-23 ·cited 5×
  Anthony Zecchino was convicted of first-degree murder based on circumstantial evidence, but the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial due to prosecutorial error in introducing lay witness opinion evidence of the defendant's guilt.
• Perez v. State
  691 So. 2d 1190· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-04-23 ·cited 5×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed Jose Perez's second-degree murder conviction because the trial court failed to instruct the jury on excusable homicide as part of the manslaughter instruction, which constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal regardless of defen
• Glasco v. State
  656 So. 2d 523· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-05-26 ·cited 5×
  Willie Glasco appeals the summary denial of his motion challenging the legality of his sentence for kidnapping and sexual battery. Glasco argues that victim injury points were improperly scored under his sentencing guidelines, but the appellate court affirms, finding any scoring
• Haywood Scott
  664 So. 2d 3· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-05-10 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court erred in allowing the jury to view the defendant's profile after deliberations began, as this constituted new evidence.
• Dixon v. State
  627 So. 2d 19· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-10-15 ·cited 5×
  Comments made by the prosecutor during closing argument that were susceptible to interpretation as comments on the defendant's silence constitute reversible error unless the state proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict.
• United States v. LaPIERRE
  998 F.2d 1460· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-12 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated if counsel is absent from any portion of a post-charge lineup, and that lay opinion testimony by a police officer identifying a defendant in surveillance photos is impermissible without sufficient foun
• Sparks v. Gilley Trucking Co.
  992 F.2d 50· 4th Cir.· 1993-04-21 ·cited 5×
  The admission of prior speeding tickets was not an abuse of discretion, as they were relevant to proving intent to race.
• Crocker v. State
  616 So. 2d 1180· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-04-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that giving a jury instruction on flight was reversible error because other inferences were permissible from the evidence.
• United States v. Filemon Bernal-Obeso
  989 F.2d 331· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-29 ·cited 5×
  The court vacated the conviction and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine the admissibility of disputed evidence regarding the informant's credibility.
• Seaman v. State
  608 So. 2d 71· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-10-20 ·cited 5×
  Norman Seaman appeals his convictions for two counts of capital sexual battery, challenging the admission of a five-year-old child victim's hearsay statements and the denial of his request for closed-circuit television testimony. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, find
• McGRIFF v. State
  601 So. 2d 1320· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-07-10 ·cited 5×
  Thomas McGriff was convicted of capital sexual battery against his eight-year-old stepdaughter. The appellate court reversed his conviction because the trial court erred in refusing to allow him to introduce evidence that other persons had engaged in sexual intercourse with the v
• Fassi v. State
  591 So. 2d 977· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-12-12 ·cited 5×
  Eugene and Ann Marie Fassi appealed their convictions for arson of a dwelling and burning to defraud an insurer. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed because the trial court erred in admitting handwriting examiner testimony comparing spray-painted graffiti to handwritten d
• United States v. Hardy
  941 F.2d 893· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-07 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction was not undermined by the initial procedural error regarding juror information, and that he knowingly waived his right to counsel.
• Sizemore v. Fletcher
  921 F.2d 667· 6th Cir.· 1990-12-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments, including appeals to class prejudice and denigration of the right to counsel, constituted prejudicial error violating due process, warranting the grant of a writ of habeas corpus.
• Gore v. Dugger
  763 F. Supp. 1110· M.D. Fla.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court erred by precluding mitigating evidence regarding Petitioner's drug and alcohol abuse and cousin's dominance, violating the Eighth Amendment, and granted a new sentencing hearing on that claim.
• Lent v. Wells
  861 F.2d 972· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-22 ·cited 5×
  The dissenting judge argues that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's failure to testify violated the defendant's privilege against self-incrimination and that this error was not harmless.
• McCLAIN v. State
  516 So. 2d 53· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-12-02 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the victim's statement, implying prior criminal activity by the defendant, constituted inadmissible character evidence and was not harmless error given the minimal direct evidence.
• Douglas v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  578 F.2d 266· 9th Cir.· 1978-07-13 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the introduction of evidence of the defendant's silence after arrest, even if constitutional error, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Eastman
  356 F.2d 880· 5th Cir.· 1966-02-15 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a remittitur cured any error from counsel's improper use of a mathematical formula to calculate damages, especially since the final judgment was not based on that formula.
• Alonso v. State
  415 So. 3d 826· Fla. 2d DCA· 2025-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the challenged evidence, and any error in designating Alonso as a prison releasee reoffender and habitual felony offender is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Maylin Rodriguez
  48 Fla. L. Weekly D2240· Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-03-13 ·cited 4×
  A directed verdict is improper where expert testimony creates a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether damage resulted from shock waves or soil movement, thereby implicating a policy exclusion.
• United States v. Perez
  86 F.4th 1311· 11th Cir.· 2023-11-14 ·cited 4×
  A sentence imposed under 18 U.S.C. § 3147 for committing a felony while on pretrial release can exceed the statutory maximum for the underlying offense, but the fact of committing the offense while on release must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt.