Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Vanderbilt v. Collins
  994 F.2d 189· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the Fifth and Sixth Amendment violations regarding psychiatric testimony were not harmless error, subsequent Supreme Court precedent on double jeopardy prevents barring a new sentencing hearing based on insufficient evidence from a prior trial.
• United States v. Yefsky
  994 F.2d 885· 1st Cir.· 1993-05-08 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed Yefsky's convictions, finding sufficient evidence for the conspiracy and mail fraud counts, and holding that any defect in the indictment's specificity was harmless error.
• Crenshaw v. State
  616 So. 2d 1219· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-04-27 ·cited 4×
  The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed Crenshaw's sentence as a habitual felony offender, withdrawing its prior reversal based on the Florida Supreme Court's decision in State v. Rucker, which held that a trial court's failure to make specific statutory findings rega
• In re Pearson
  990 F.2d 653· 1st Cir.· 1993-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that mandamus is not warranted because the petitioners failed to demonstrate palpable error or a special risk of irreparable harm from the district court's order appointing a special master.
• United States v. Smith
  984 F.2d 1084· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-21 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Watkins
  983 F.2d 1413· 7th Cir.· 1993-01-19 ·cited 4×
  The court reversed the conviction, finding the record did not clearly establish a waiver of the right to be present during trial when the defendant was mute.
• United States v. Anderson
  981 F.2d 1560· 10th Cir.· 1992-12-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Anderson's convictions, and that unlawfully obtained evidence required reversal of Cordova's and Salinas' convictions.
• State v. Guess
  613 So. 2d 406· Fla.· 1992-12-17 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court's refusal to allow a defendant to testify outside the jury's presence regarding the voluntariness of a custodial statement constitutes non-harmless error under the Florida Constitution, independent of federal harmless error analys
• Myron Morales v. State
  609 So. 2d 765· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-12-08 ·cited 4×
  The trial court reversibly erred by denying a defendant the right to a concluding argument when the defendant offered no testimony except his own, as guaranteed by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.250.
• Goldsmith v. S.R. Witkowski
  981 F.2d 697· 4th Cir.· 1992-11-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient to support the petitioner's drug convictions, and the jury's consideration of stricken testimony did not violate his rights.
• United States v. Darius Koshnevis
  979 F.2d 691· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the stop and secondary inspection were lawful, Koshnevis voluntarily consented to the search of the passenger compartment, and the trunk search was justified by probable cause. The court also found that any instructional error was harmless.
• United States v. Kelly
  973 F.2d 1145· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for continuance, refusing to produce certain evidence, or admitting hearsay statements of a co-conspirator, and that the Bank Bribery Act was not unconstitutionally vague as applied.
• Stockler v. Garratt
  974 F.2d 730· 6th Cir.· 1992-09-09 ·cited 4×
  The court should apply a harmless error analysis, and any error in this case would be harmless as a matter of law.
• Vaughn v. State
  604 So. 2d 1272· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-09-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of a prior sexual battery was improperly admitted to prove identity because the similarities were not sufficiently distinctive or unusual.
• Jeffers v. Lewis
  974 F.2d 1075· 9th Cir.· 1992-08-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Arizona Supreme Court erred by affirming a death sentence without adequately considering mitigating evidence or conducting a proper reweighing of factors after invalidating one aggravating circumstance.
• United States v. Polan
  970 F.2d 1280· 3d Cir.· 1992-07-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the indictment's substantive counts were not defective, the trial court did not err in refusing to dismiss jurors for cause, the Speedy Trial Act was not violated, the court did not err in refusing to disclose psychiatric records, and the jury instruction on r
• Dola Cullen Boykin v. State
  601 So. 2d 1312· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-07-08 ·cited 4×
  Dola Boykin appealed his conviction for robbery and aggravated assault, challenging the admission of hearsay testimony from a police officer regarding information received about a suspect named 'Bill Cosby' in a similar crime. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed
• Williams v. State
  594 So. 2d 824· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-02-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on the permissive lesser included offense of sale of cocaine.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Mills
  956 F.2d 443· 3d Cir.· 1992-02-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process was violated when the district court arbitrarily excluded a material and favorable defense witness's testimony.
• United States v. Camacho
  955 F.2d 950· 4th Cir.· 1992-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that commencing trial in the defendant's absence, due to a weather delay, constituted an abuse of discretion and was not harmless error.
• Powell v. Coughlin
  953 F.2d 744· 2d Cir.· 1991-12-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the OMH policy allowing confidential consultations between mental health staff and hearing officers is permissible, and that individual disciplinary hearing outcomes should not be automatically reversed without harmless error analysis.
• United States v. Riggi
  951 F.2d 1368· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-12 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Mateo
  950 F.2d 44· 1st Cir.· 1991-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel at sentencing when his appointed attorney remained present but offered no advocacy, and the defendant repeatedly indicated he was unrepresented.
• United States v. Eloy Horacio DeSOTO
  950 F.2d 626· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred by limiting cross-examination regarding a witness's potential bias, violating the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, and that this error was not harmless.
• Wealot v. Armontrout
  948 F.2d 497· 8th Cir.· 1991-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the limitation of cross-examination designed to show a witness's motive for fabrication violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation, and this violation was not harmless error.
• Rodriguez v. State
  588 So. 2d 1031· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-11-05 ·cited 4×
  Rodriguez appeals his convictions for burglary, kidnapping, and assault of his former girlfriend, raising claims of prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument and improper handling of evidence, as well as challenging his split sentence. The appellate court affirmed the conv
• United States v. Alikpo
  944 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that commencing jury selection in the defendant's absence, without a valid waiver or justification, constitutes reversible error because it violates the defendant's fundamental right to be present and can prejudice the substantial rights of the defendant.
• United States v. Newman
  943 F.2d 1155· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's elicitation of testimony regarding the defendant's post-arrest silence violated his due process rights and was not harmless error.
• United States v. Sanchez
  944 F.2d 497· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a warrantless search of a container within a car is permissible under the automobile exception, and that a prosecutor's improper vouching for a witness did not prejudice the defendant due to curative instructions.
• Lefevre v. State
  585 So. 2d 457· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-09-04 ·cited 4×
  Randall Scott Lefevre was convicted of attempted second-degree murder and shooting into an occupied vehicle after a confrontation with two white men in Bonifay, Florida. The District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court erroneously instruc
• Vincent v. Al Parke
  942 F.2d 989· 6th Cir.· 1991-08-23 ·cited 4×
  The admission of a co-defendant's out-of-court statement implicating the defendant violated the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
• United States v. Reindeau
  947 F.2d 32· 2d Cir.· 1991-08-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that restricting the cross-examination of the government's expert witness regarding whether the explosive device was designed as a weapon impermissibly prevented the defendants from presenting their defense, constituting reversible error.
• United States v. Easton
  937 F.2d 160· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the requirement for the government attorney's signature on an indictment is non-jurisdictional and is waived by a guilty plea. The court also found that the issue of the trial judge's participation in plea negotiations requires remand.
• Jewell Scott v. State OF La. & Bruce Lynn
  934 F.2d 631· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction error for attempted murder was harmless regarding the concurrent sentences but modified the dismissal to be without prejudice due to potential future collateral consequences.
• United States v. Pabisz
  936 F.2d 80· 2d Cir.· 1991-06-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction requiring a good faith defense to be objectively reasonable was erroneous, violating the Supreme Court's ruling in Cheek v. United States.
• Burney v. State
  579 So. 2d 746· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-04-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay testimony that implicated the defendant, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Williams
  927 F.2d 95· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-04 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed convictions for narcotics violations, finding no prejudicial error in jury selection, admission of plea allocutions, or Brady claims.
• Pinkney v. Keane
  920 F.2d 1090· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-07 ·cited 4×
  A federal court in a habeas corpus proceeding may reexamine a state appellate court's suppression ruling if it appears erroneous, even if the state ruling favored the petitioner. The court found the search of the petitioner's car was constitutional.
• Robert A. Lieberman, M.D. v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg.
  573 So. 2d 349· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-12-06 ·cited 4×
  Dr. Robert Lieberman appeals the revocation of his medical license by the Florida Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medicine for alleged sexual abuse of patients and substandard medical care. The appellate court reverses in part and remands because inadmissible poly
• McGUIRE v. Estelle
  919 F.2d 578· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-23 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc, with dissenting judges arguing the panel's decision wrongly overturned a state conviction by misapplying federal law and interfering with state court rulings.
• Buddy Nichols v. Mac Sim Butler
  917 F.2d 518· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-20 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief, holding that the petitioner's fundamental right to testify was violated when his counsel threatened to withdraw if he insisted on testifying.
• United States v. Sharpe Pitts, Jr.
  918 F.2d 197· D.C. Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a missing witness instruction and argument are improper when the absent witness could only support the defendant's version of events by incriminating themselves.
• United States v. Bolick
  917 F.2d 135· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding unrelated LSD sales by a witness was proper background evidence, and the admission of a statement corroborating testimony was also proper, despite procedural arguments.
• Harper v. Kelly
  916 F.2d 54· 2d Cir.· 1990-10-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's restriction of cross-examination into the victim's emotional state during the robbery violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Norris
  910 F.2d 1246· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-27 ·cited 4×
  A defendant's prior plea of not guilty, even in a case where they were convicted, cannot be used to impeach their credibility by characterizing the plea as a lie.
• Leach v. Kolb
  911 F.2d 1249· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a directed verdict on the issue of insanity is permissible in Wisconsin when the defendant fails to present sufficient evidence, and that improper joinder of offenses is not grounds for habeas relief unless it results in prejudice denying a fair trial.
• United States v. Best
  913 F.2d 1179· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the unauthorized placement of government exhibit binders into the jury room constituted reversible error because it created a reasonable possibility of affecting the jury's verdict, especially in a close case.
• Unruh v. State
  560 So. 2d 266· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-04-11 ·cited 4×
  Kenneth Ray Unruh appeals convictions and sentences for crimes spanning multiple counties, including armed confrontation with law enforcement in Suwannee County and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The court affirms the firearm possession conviction but reverses the
• Williams v. State
  559 So. 2d 372· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-04-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines were valid, the case must be remanded for resentencing because the written reasons were not filed contemporaneously with the oral pronouncement, as required by Ree v. State. However, two specific bases
• Cleveland v. State
  557 So. 2d 959· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-03-14 ·cited 4×
  Mitchell Cleveland appealed the revocation of his probation after cocaine was discovered in a locked toilet stall at a probation center and he admitted smoking it. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of his motion to suppress the evidence and statement