Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Healey v. State
  464 So. 2d 213· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-02-19 ·cited 4×
• Reaves v. State
  458 So. 2d 53· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-10-23 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that statements suppressed solely on Miranda grounds (not involuntariness grounds) are admissible to impeach a defendant's trial testimony, even where defense counsel relied on the trial court's inadvertent use of the word 'involunt
• United States v. August
  745 F.2d 400· 6th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge's comment to the jury about a conspiracy existing, while error, constituted harmless error due to strong curative instructions, jury questioning, and substantial evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Darwin
  742 F.2d 1325· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that premature disclosure of a dangerous special offender notice to the presiding judge, even if the judge resealed it and the error was deemed non-prejudicial by the trial court, constitutes reversible error under 18 U.S.C. § 3575(a) unless subsequent rulings were
• Bailey v. M.C. Hamby
  744 F.2d 24· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the defendant's confession was obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights after he invoked his right to counsel, its admission was harmless error given the strength of other evidence.
• McPHADDER v. State
  450 So. 2d 1264· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-06-13 ·cited 4×
  Aubrey McPhadder was convicted of maintaining places where alcoholic beverages were sold without a license in violation of Florida's beverage laws. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction, holding that the amended information sufficiently alleged a prior convic
• United States v. Teague
  737 F.2d 378· 4th Cir.· 1984-06-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad acts evidence and the prosecutor's contact with a defense witness's attorney did not constitute reversible error, as any potential prejudice was either properly managed by jury instructions or harmless.
• Lacy v. Gabriel
  732 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1984-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a Sixth Amendment confrontation clause claim, raised sua sponte by the district court and not exhausted in state courts, renders a habeas petition "mixed" and requires dismissal of that claim, but the petition is not considered mixed if the petitioner only rai
• Trinca v. State
  446 So. 2d 719· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-03-14 ·cited 4×
  Leonard Trinca was convicted of trafficking in methaqualone and battery on a law enforcement officer. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial due to prosecutorial misconduct, specifically the prosecutor's improper comments during closing argument implying that t
• United States v. Jenkins
  728 F.2d 396· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in limiting its review of the search warrant's validity solely to the contents of the affidavit, and a remand for further testimony was proper.
• Adams v. State
  445 So. 2d 1132· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-03-02 ·cited 4×
  This case addresses the admissibility of confessions in joint criminal trials, specifically concerning the "Bruton rule" which prohibits the use of a co-defendant's confession that implicates another defendant. The court found that while there were some errors in how the confessi
• Walter J.D. Moffett v. McCAULEY
  724 F.2d 581· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the district court erred in excluding a prison investigation report solely on trustworthiness grounds, the error was harmless because the report's contents were unlikely to affect the jury's verdict. The court also held the report inadmissible as an admi
• Connor v. United States Civil Serv. Comm'n
  721 F.2d 1054· 6th Cir.· 1983-11-28 ·cited 4×
  The court concurred that while the oral reply hearing might have been perfunctory, the employee's own conduct foreclosed any firm conclusion to that effect, thus justifying the agency's action.
• Perdomo v. State
  439 So. 2d 314· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-10-18 ·cited 4×
  Pedro Pablo Perdomo appealed his robbery conviction, arguing that the prosecutor's closing remarks improperly directed the jury to base its verdict on the message it would send to the criminal community rather than on the evidence. The Florida District Court of Appeal agreed and
• Molina v. State
  447 So. 2d 253· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-10-04 ·cited 4×
  Molina's conviction was reversed a second time because the prosecutor again elicited improper testimony about the defendant's contact with co-defendants, despite the court's prior reversal on identical grounds. Although the state offered an allegedly inculpatory statement as harm
• Broomfield v. State
  436 So. 2d 435· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-08-31 ·cited 4×
  A defendant cannot be convicted and sentenced for both armed robbery and the lesser included offense of grand theft.
• Goudlock v. Marshall
  712 F.2d 238· 6th Cir.· 1983-07-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Weir v. Fletcher narrowly limited Doyle v. Ohio, vacating prior Sixth Circuit precedent that had granted habeas corpus relief based on an expansive reading of Doyle.
• Brown v. State
  427 So. 2d 304· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-03-22 ·cited 4×
  Prosecutor's closing argument improperly referenced defendant's failure to testify, requiring reversal of second-degree murder conviction and remand for new trial where attempted second-degree murder instruction should be considered.
• Young v. Callahan
  700 F.2d 32· 1st Cir.· 1983-02-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that confining a defendant to the prisoner's dock without a finding of necessity for security, over objection, unconstitutionally impaired his right to a fair trial.
• United States v. Simmons
  699 F.2d 1250· D.C. Cir.· 1983-02-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's conduct interfered with a defense witness's decision to testify, potentially denying the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Martinez
  694 F.2d 71· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding inferring intent was constitutional in this case, as it allowed a permissible inference rather than creating a mandatory presumption or shifting the burden of proof.
• Bain v. State
  422 So. 2d 962· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-11-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's question eliciting the nature of the defendant's prior conviction was improper and prejudicial.
• Ramirez v. Jones
  683 F.2d 712· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-30 ·cited 4×
  A petitioner's failure to object at trial does not preclude federal habeas review if the state appellate court considered the merits, but the failure to object remains a factor in the federal court's analysis.
• Donnie McDONALD v. Lucas
  677 F.2d 518· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's course of conduct, including limited answers to questions after refusing to sign a Miranda waiver, did not constitute an implied waiver of his Miranda rights.
• United States v. Oggoian
  678 F.2d 671· 7th Cir.· 1982-05-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions adequately conveyed the elements of knowledge and intent for the crime of filing false tax returns, and that the evidence supported the conviction.
• Angel v. Overberg
  664 F.2d 1052· 6th Cir.· 1981-11-25 ·cited 4×
• Bollinger v. State
  402 So. 2d 570· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-08-26 ·cited 4×
  Eugene Bollinger was convicted of conspiracy to possess more than 20 grams of cannabis, a misdemeanor, in circuit court. The Florida District Court of Appeal, First District reversed his conviction on two independent grounds: the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to try a misdeme
• McNULTY v. Antone Olim
  652 F.2d 1369· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's trial counsel's alleged errors did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel because they did not prejudice the appellant under the applicable legal standards.
• United States v. Coats
  652 F.2d 1002· D.C. Cir.· 1981-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the prosecutor's remark suggesting the jury might draw an impermissible inference from the defendant's prior conviction was an error, it was harmless because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming.
• Soap v. Carter
  632 F.2d 872· 10th Cir.· 1980-10-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a prosecutor's racially prejudicial remarks in closing argument, which appealed to stereotypes and created a probability of jury impairment, violated the petitioner's due process rights.
• United States v. Brunk
  587 F.2d 910· 8th Cir.· 1978-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a judge's ex parte communication with the jury, even if concerning a discretionary matter like replaying evidence, creates a presumption of prejudice that the government must overcome.
• Tucker v. Wolff
  581 F.2d 235· 9th Cir.· 1978-08-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing on the speedy trial claim and the constitutionality of a state statute creating a presumption of intent.
• Grandison v. Warden, Maryland House OF Correction and Mrs. Linda A. Corrick, Records Supervisor
  580 F.2d 1231· 4th Cir.· 1978-07-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the use of prior convictions, void under Long v. Robinson, to impeach the appellant's testimony was harmless error. The court also noted, but did not decide, the issue of whether misrepresenting age waives juvenile status.
• Smith v. Estelle
  569 F.2d 944· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The admission of a co-defendant's confession, which implicated the petitioner, without opportunity for cross-examination and under confusing jury instructions, violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. This error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Twyman v. State OF Okla. & Richard A. Crisp
  560 F.2d 422· 10th Cir.· 1977-08-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination regarding prior uncounselled misdemeanor convictions and the defendant's delayed disclosure of information about the murder weapon did not constitute reversible constitutional error.
• United States v. KAY
  545 F.2d 491· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-17 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the jury instruction misconstrued the statute and injected reversible error into the trial.
• Martin v. Estelle
  541 F.2d 1147· 5th Cir.· 1976-11-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the errors of a rap sheet being seen by jurors and a juror speaking with a police officer were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Ragusa v. State
  338 So. 2d 1103· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-10-22 ·cited 4×
  Vincent Ragusa appeals his conviction on two counts of grand larceny by fraudulent representation. While the appellate court found sufficient evidence supported the conviction on the merits, it reversed due to prosecutorial misconduct during cross-examination involving unrelated
• United States v. Walker
  538 F.2d 266· 9th Cir.· 1976-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the government's failure to disclose a tape recording of a defendant's conversation was harmless error because it did not affect the substantial rights of the defendant. The court also rejected other claims regarding discovery, jury composition, Bruton rights,
• Thomas v. State
  328 So. 2d 545· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-03-02 ·cited 4×
  Cecil Mack Thomas was convicted by jury of assault with intent to commit murder after shooting Freddy Smart twice. On appeal, Thomas challenged the admission of testimony regarding alleged statements pressuring a witness to change her testimony and his denied waiver of jury trial
• United States v. LEE
  513 F.2d 423· D.C. Cir.· 1975-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence was properly denied.
• Snyder v. Ira M. Coiner
  510 F.2d 224· 4th Cir.· 1975-02-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's limitation on cross-examination, even if an abuse of discretion, was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the denial of a motion to disqualify a juror was not a due process violation.
• United States v. Clement
  504 F.2d 921· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge's erroneous and prejudicial limitation of the term 'rip-off' to narcotics transactions deprived the defendants of a fair trial.
• Rohe v. Froehlke
  500 F.2d 113· 2d Cir.· 1974-07-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Army Regulation implicitly grants a reservist the right to be informed of and rebut adverse factual allegations made during an appeal of an involuntary active duty order.
• United States ex rel. Walter Henderson v. Brierley
  468 F.2d 1193· 3d Cir.· 1972-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, nor was the statute allowing magistrate review unconstitutional.
• United States v. Alcibiades Garcia Vasquez
  460 F.2d 202· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-25 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge held that the cross-examination regarding the defendant's prior conviction was proper and, even if erroneous, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States ex rel. Herbert James Daley v. Yeager
  415 F.2d 779· 3d Cir.· 1969-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the relator's constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments were violated when police obtained consent to search his apartment after he had requested counsel at a preliminary hearing.
• Wilson v. Bowie
  408 F.2d 1105· 9th Cir.· 1969-03-27 ·cited 4×
  The use of a preliminary hearing transcript at trial, without a showing that the witness was unavailable, violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• Mesac Damas v. State
  423 So. 3d 811· Fla.· 2025-10-01 ·cited 3×
  The trial court's competency determinations were proper under the Dusky standard, and Damas's competency claim is procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal. Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge competency or request additional ev
• Wolf v. State
  416 So. 3d 1117· Fla.· 2025-07-31 ·cited 3×
  Steven Matthew Wolf was convicted of first-degree murder, two counts of sexual battery with force, and tampering with evidence for the brutal rape and murder of a woman whose body was found near Marathon, Florida in 2018, and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed