Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Harris v. State
  34 So. 3d 187· Fla. 1st DCA· 2010-05-06 ·cited 3×
  Dorothy Harris was convicted of conspiracy to possess hydrocodone based primarily on her brother's testimony. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the trial court committed reversible error by admitting testimony about Harris's outstanding warrant fo
• Arrieta-Rolon v. State
  36 So. 3d 124· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-04-21 ·cited 3×
  Juan Arrieta-Rolon was convicted of first-degree murder for fatally shooting his girlfriend. The appellate court agreed that the trial court erred in admitting a witness's statements to police as excited utterances, but affirmed the conviction because the statements were harmless
• Torres-Matmoros v. State
  34 So. 3d 83· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-04-07 ·cited 3×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on bolstering, hearsay, prosecutorial comments, or the admission of evidence.
• Euriell Laidler v. State
  10 So. 3d 1136· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-05-22 ·cited 3×
  Euriell Laidler appeals his convictions for two counts of armed robbery with a firearm and one count of aggravated assault with a firearm. The trial court denied his motion for a continuance after the State disclosed a previously undisclosed witness one week before trial and fail
• Daniels v. State
  4 So. 3d 745· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-03-04 ·cited 3×
  Edward Daniels was convicted of capital sexual battery of a six-year-old child based primarily on the child's testimony and expert opinion evidence from a medical examiner. The court reversed his conviction and life sentence, finding that the trial court abused its discretion in
• Deans v. State
  988 So. 2d 1271· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-08-29 ·cited 3×
  David Deans appealed his convictions for attempted sexual battery on a child, burglary, and false imprisonment. The Florida appellate court reversed his convictions, holding that the trial court erred by admitting an out-of-court photo pack identification testimony from a detecti
• Williams v. State
  976 So. 2d 1197· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-03-26 ·cited 3×
  Richard Williams was convicted of second-degree murder in the shooting death of his live-in girlfriend. Although the appellate court found that the Miranda warnings given to Williams were legally insufficient under controlling precedent, it affirmed the conviction on harmless err
• Spoor v. State
  975 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-03-12 ·cited 3×
  Michael Spoor was convicted of lewd or lascivious exhibition based on identification by two young girls, but the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed because the prosecutor improperly argued facts not in evidence during closing argument, specifically that Spoor obtained his t
• Eldrick R. Andrews v. State
  973 So. 2d 1280· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-02-20 ·cited 3×
  Andrews was convicted of burglary of an occupied structure and petit theft. The appellate court affirmed the petit theft conviction but reversed the burglary conviction, finding that inadmissible hearsay testimony regarding how Andrews gained access to the property was not harmle
• Burnett v. State
  973 So. 2d 1203· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-01-16 ·cited 3×
  Jon Paul Burnett appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file a motion to sever possession of child pornography charges from lewd or lascivious conduct charges. The court reversed the denial of claim one
• Freeman v. State
  969 So. 2d 473· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-11-16 ·cited 3×
  Robert Freeman appeals his conviction for manslaughter in the death of a neighbor who was mauled by his six pit bulls. Freeman argues he should have been charged under the Dangerous Dog Act (a misdemeanor) rather than manslaughter (a felony), and that he was entitled to a jury in
• Pintado v. State
  970 So. 2d 857· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-11-14 ·cited 3×
  Raul Pintado appeals the revocation of his probation for alleged violations including stabbing his girlfriend and driving a stolen truck. The trial court excluded defense witnesses listed on the day of the hearing due to a discovery violation, and Pintado challenges this as a vio
• Wessel v. State
  968 So. 2d 634· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-10-26 ·cited 3×
  Walter Wessel was convicted of lewd and lascivious molestation of his grandsons, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly admitted evidence of Wessel's sexual orientation. The court held that such evidence w
• Parrish v. State
  954 So. 2d 63· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-03-28 ·cited 3×
• Kolp v. State
  932 So. 2d 1283· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-07-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the admission of a lay witness's opinion testimony regarding the purpose of hollow-point bullets was error and not harmless.
• Occhicone v. Crosby
  455 F.3d 1306· 11th Cir.· 2006-07-14 ·cited 3×
  Dominick Occhicone appealed the denial of his federal habeas corpus petition challenging his murder convictions and death sentence, claiming the prosecution violated Giglio v. United States by failing to correct perjured testimony from witness Phil Baker regarding a deal for leni
• Tubwell v. State
  922 So. 2d 378· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-03-03 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court erred in overruling the appellant's objection to the accuracy of his prior convictions at resentencing, as the state failed to prove them.
• Harrell v. Aztec Env't, Inc.
  921 So. 2d 805· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-02-27 ·cited 3×
  In this wrongful death case arising from a truck-pedestrian collision, the Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a jury verdict for the defendants because the trial court abused its discretion by excluding two optometrist witnesses who were disclosed late but whose depo
• Vasco Howard v. State
  869 So. 2d 725· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-04-07 ·cited 3×
  Vasco Howard was convicted of armed robbery after a jury trial. The appellate court reversed his conviction because the trial court improperly dismissed a prospective juror for cause during voir dire without allowing defense counsel to question the juror further, violating his ri
• Tookes v. State
  842 So. 2d 1063· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-04-23 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court's instruction to the jury that the state did not have to prove a weapon was a real firearm was an incorrect statement of law and not harmless error.
• Latimore v. State
  819 So. 2d 956· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-06-26 ·cited 3×
  Jimmy Latimore was convicted of burglary of a conveyance after being arrested during a police decoy operation in a high-crime area of Fort Lauderdale. The appellate court reversed, holding that evidence and prosecutor statements characterizing the arrest location as a high-crime
• Marman v. State
  814 So. 2d 1158· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-04-12 ·cited 3×
  Sylvia Marman was convicted of second-degree murder after trial, but the Florida appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial judge improperly prohibited defense counsel from presenting closing argument on a jury instruction regarding justifiable use of
• Amparo v. State
  818 So. 2d 565· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-03-06 ·cited 3×
• Ritchie v. State
  720 So. 2d 261· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-09-28 ·cited 3×
  Donna Ritchie was convicted of capital sexual battery against her young son based partly on the child's videotaped testimony. The court reverses and remands for a new trial because the trial court failed to make statutorily required, individualized findings of necessity for using
• Dietrich v. State
  673 So. 2d 93· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-05-01 ·cited 3×
  Ann Dietrich was convicted of grand theft after $800 went missing from her bank teller drawer. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed her conviction because the trial court improperly admitted hearsay evidence regarding communications between the defendant and a witness, v
• Kipp v. State
  668 So. 2d 214· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-01-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to suppress incriminating statements obtained during custodial interrogations where the suspect equivocally invoked his right to remain silent and questioning continued without clarification.
• O'Rourke v. State
  661 So. 2d 800· Fla.· 1995-09-14 ·cited 3×
  A trial court's failure to conduct an adequate Richardson hearing for a discovery violation is not per se reversible error and is subject to harmless error analysis.
• United States v. Garrudo
  869 F. Supp. 1574· S.D. Fla.· 1994-09-09 ·cited 3×
  A judge who is the subject of a criminal investigation must recuse himself from presiding over criminal trials, as this reasonably questions his impartiality. Failure to do so warrants a new trial.
• Manly v. State
  640 So. 2d 142· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-07-27 ·cited 3×
  Patti Manly appealed her conviction for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer. The court reversed because the trial court improperly admitted testimony about a threat Manly made to a witness, which violated the Williams rule prohibiting collatera
• Evans v. State
  627 So. 2d 96· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-11-23 ·cited 3×
  Danny Evans appeals his convictions for first-degree murder, attempted armed robbery, armed burglary, armed robbery, grand theft, and firearm display arising from a botched robbery attempt that resulted in a death. The appellate court affirms the convictions, finding that the tri
• Stone v. State
  626 So. 2d 295· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-11-05 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the prosecutor's and judge's comments concerning the witness's fear and credibility were improper and constituted reversible error.
• Phillips v. State
  621 So. 2d 566· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-07-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that an improper flight instruction was not harmless error, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Zulquarnan Khan
  993 F.2d 1368· 9th Cir.· 1993-04-06 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendant could not be prosecuted for using a communication facility to facilitate a drug conspiracy (Count VIII) because the doctrine of specialty was violated, as Pakistan did not unambiguously agree to extradite him for that specific offense. The court
• Howard v. State
  615 So. 2d 229· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-08 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to make specific findings for habitual felony offender status was harmless error under the circumstances.
• United States v. Canterbury
  985 F.2d 483· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-14 ·cited 3×
  The prosecutor's comment on the defendant's post-arrest silence, after Miranda warnings were given, violated his due process rights and was not harmless error.
• Ramseur v. Beyer
  983 F.2d 1215· 3d Cir.· 1992-12-31 ·cited 3×
  The court did not definitively rule on whether a new indictment can cure a prior constitutionally defective indictment, leaving the question open for future cases.
• Johnson v. Armontrout
  961 F.2d 748· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-10 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a defendant is deprived of his constitutional right to an impartial jury and effective counsel when jurors who convicted a co-defendant in the same crime are empaneled without sufficient inquiry into their bias, and counsel fails to challenge them for cause.
• Dixon v. State
  589 So. 2d 1011· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-11-20 ·cited 3×
  A dissenting justice argued that the erroneous admission of evidence was not harmless error, citing discrepancies in identification, lack of physical evidence, and a substantial alibi defense.
• United States v. Salam Daniel
  932 F.2d 517· 6th Cir.· 1991-05-07 ·cited 3×
  The court held that even if the first statement was coerced, the second, independently admissible statement was voluntary and sufficient to uphold the conviction, and any error in admitting the first statement was harmless.
• Stinnett v. State
  576 So. 2d 927· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-03-28 ·cited 3×
  Ron Lee Stinnett was convicted on four charges after the trial court denied his request to represent himself at a suppression hearing while retaining standby counsel. The court held that while the trial court erred in misstating the law regarding his right to counsel at different
• United States v. Fidel Barragan Vargas
  933 F.2d 701· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-08 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court's procedure for presenting informant testimony violated the defendants' Sixth Amendment confrontation rights and that the confrontation clause violations were not harmless error.
• LEE v. State
  566 So. 2d 264· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-05-14 ·cited 3×
  Lee appeals his conviction for kidnapping, sexual battery with a deadly weapon, robbery with a firearm, and firearm possession by a felon following retrial. The court reverses because the trial court improperly allowed evidence of a collateral bank robbery to impeach Lee's testim
• Poukner v. State
  556 So. 2d 1231· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-02-21 ·cited 3×
  Kenneth Poukner appealed his convictions for sexual battery and lewd, lascivious assault on a child. The appellate court found merit only in his sentencing argument, holding that the trial court improperly sentenced him for lewd and lascivious assault without using the required s
• Sanchez v. State
  537 So. 2d 660· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-01-17 ·cited 3×
  Sanchez appealed his conviction for third-degree murder and robbery, challenging the trial court's restriction on cross-examining the key state witness regarding the witness's motive to lie and protect a relative. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding any error in
• Davis v. Dugger
  703 F. Supp. 916· M.D. Fla.· 1988-12-23 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a claim not fairly presented to state courts, even if the state waives the exhaustion defense, may be dismissed if it requires judicial findings of fact and would violate comity and federalism principles.
• Tafero v. Dugger
  681 F. Supp. 1531· S.D. Fla.· 1988-03-05 ·cited 3×
  The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that while a Lockett error occurred, it was harmless, and the Caldwell claim did not establish a violation of the jury's role.
• United States v. Villano
  797 F.2d 1547· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-05 ·cited 3×
  The court held that when an oral sentence conflicts with a written judgment, the court must discern the sentencing judge's intent rather than automatically applying the oral sentence.
• McKINON v. Louie L. Wainwright
  705 F.2d 419· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-16 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred or lacked merit, and thus affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Miami Purveyors, Inc. v. Forte
  407 So. 2d 330· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-12-15 ·cited 3×
  Miami Purveyors appealed from a judgment against Biscayne Bay Club, Inc., and an involuntary dismissal of its action against Forte. The Third District reversed both, holding that Purveyors presented prima facie evidence of an oral agreement making Forte primarily liable for payme
• McALLISTER v. Brown
  555 F.2d 1277· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the state was not required to disclose the informant's identity and that the admission of police testimony regarding the informant's statement was not the use of an involuntary confession.