Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Deramus v. State
  652 So. 2d 1245· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-04-07 ·cited 2×
  Antonio Deramus appealed three concurrent 30-year habitual offender sentences, challenging whether he received adequate written notice of intent to habitualize as required by Ashley v. State. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the sentences, holding that the plea agreeme
• Smith v. State
  648 So. 2d 1259· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-02-01 ·cited 2×
  Stephen Smith appeals his convictions for first degree murder, robbery with a deadly weapon, and armed burglary with assault, as well as his sentence of consecutive life sentences. The court affirmed the convictions but reversed and remanded the sentencing, finding that consecuti
• Samick Corp. v. Jackson
  645 So. 2d 1095· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-11-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the attorney's questioning and argument about a settled claim were improper, the trial court erred by not conducting a harmless error analysis before granting a new trial.
• Darius R. Shipman v. State
  647 So. 2d 226· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-10-17 ·cited 2×
  Darius Shipman was convicted of sale or delivery of cocaine to a minor and possession of cocaine based primarily on testimony from an undercover civilian operative. The court reversed because the trial court improperly allowed the prosecutor to bolster the witness's credibility t
• McCRAY v. State
  640 So. 2d 1215· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-08-05 ·cited 2×
  James McCray appeals his convictions for burglary, criminal mischief, and trespass arising from domestic disputes with his former girlfriend. The court reversed because the trial judge failed to conduct a Richardson hearing regarding an undisclosed statement by the defendant and
• Bonaventure v. State
  637 So. 2d 55· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-05-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in making the sentence for using a firearm during a felony run consecutive to the minimum mandatory sentence for first-degree murder, but affirmed the consecutive nature of other sentences.
• Freeman v. State
  630 So. 2d 1225· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that improper references to the defendant's drug dealing were not harmless error and required reversal.
• State v. Carlton McCRAY
  626 So. 2d 1017· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-11-05 ·cited 2×
  The State of Florida appeals a trial court's order suppressing cocaine found in Carlton McCray's hat during a search at Clearwater High School. The appellate court reverses, holding that the search was lawful as a search incident to an arrest, despite the trial court's finding th
• In the Interest of J.B. v. State
  624 So. 2d 792· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the failure to inform a parent of their right to counsel at the initial dependency proceeding is not harmless error when that adjudication is used as a basis for termination of parental rights.
• United States v. Aguilar
  994 F.2d 609· 9th Cir.· 1993-09-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove knowledge for wiretap disclosure and that the jury instruction on knowledge was proper, rejecting the First Amendment challenge.
• Cuthbertson v. State
  623 So. 2d 778· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-08-18 ·cited 2×
  The court reversed Cuthbertson's armed robbery conviction because the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial when a prosecution witness testified about prior irrelevant robberies implicating the defendant. The court found that the trial court's curative jury poll wa
• Hall v. State
  622 So. 2d 1132· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-08-13 ·cited 2×
  Reginald Hall was convicted of aggravated battery without a firearm after a pistol-whipping incident. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction, finding that the trial court improperly admitted hearsay testimony from a detective regarding an out-of-court identi
• United States v. Hooker
  997 F.2d 67· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-26 ·cited 2×
  A conviction under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(k) and 924 requires the jury to find the defendant knew the serial numbers were removed or altered. A state officer acting in cooperation with and under the control of federal officers is considered a federal officer for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §
• Hoversten v. State OF Iowa
  998 F.2d 614· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the use of a one-way mirror to shield a child witness from the defendant violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rights because no case-specific finding of necessity was made, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. March
  999 F.2d 456· 10th Cir.· 1993-07-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's confession was admissible, the jury instruction error was harmless, and the denial of a sentence reduction was not clearly erroneous. The Judgment and Commitment Order contained a clerical error requiring correction.
• United States v. Calise
  996 F.2d 1019· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of access to a government witness's personnel file was harmless error, and that a defendant's pre-arrest silence and refusal to sign a Miranda waiver were properly handled by the trial court.
• United States v. Thompson
  994 F.2d 864· D.C. Cir.· 1993-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed both the conviction and the sentence, finding no reversible error in the refusal of a lesser included offense instruction or in the sentencing calculation.
• Stephens v. Miller
  989 F.2d 264· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of the defendant's testimony regarding a conversation during the alleged incident violated his Sixth Amendment right to testify and was not harmless error.
• Phillips v. State
  621 So. 2d 734· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-06-08 ·cited 2×
  Daniel Phillips appeals his conviction for manslaughter and culpable negligence arising from a traffic accident that killed one person and injured two others. The court affirmed the conviction while certifying to the Florida Supreme Court a question regarding the Department of He
• United States v. Brennan
  994 F.2d 918· 1st Cir.· 1993-06-03 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in the trial court's decisions regarding evidence, jury instructions, or procedural matters.
• Gethers v. State
  620 So. 2d 201· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-05-26 ·cited 2×
  Betty Gethers was convicted of aggravated assault with a firearm after being acquitted of armed burglary. The appellate court affirmed her conviction, finding that although the trial court erred in failing to require her personal presence at a hearing on the admissibility of a pr
• United States v. Sallins
  993 F.2d 344· 3d Cir.· 1993-05-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the contents of a police radio dispatch and a 911 computer record, offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, constituted inadmissible hearsay and their admission was not harmless error.
• United States v. Reshat Shabani
  993 F.2d 1419· 9th Cir.· 1993-05-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the indictment was sufficient without alleging an overt act, the jury should have been instructed that the government must prove an overt act.
• Chaney v. State
  617 So. 2d 844· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-05-05 ·cited 2×
  James Chaney was convicted of sexual battery with slight force and attempted robbery. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed both convictions and sentences, but modified the judgment to correctly reflect that sexual battery with slight force is a second-degree felony (not f
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Knight
  989 F.2d 619· 3d Cir.· 1993-03-15 ·cited 2×
  When no pretrial motion deadline is set, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2(a) implies a requirement for a defendant to file notice of intent to raise an insanity defense within a reasonable time; filing three days before trial without justifiable cause is unreasonably late
• United States v. Lewis
  987 F.2d 1349· 8th Cir.· 1993-03-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of a witness's testimony regarding a prior consistent statement was harmless error, and that the defendant waived the right to an entrapment defense by failing to raise it before the case was submitted to the jury.
• Thomas v. State
  618 So. 2d 155· Fla.· 1993-03-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while admitting certain statements on a redacted confession tape was error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and other claims raised by the appellant were without merit.
• United States v. Morris
  988 F.2d 1335· 4th Cir.· 1993-03-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it is reversible error, subject to harmless error analysis, for a prosecutor to cross-examine the wife of an accused about her invocation of the marital privilege before the grand jury. The court also held that the district judge's prior involvement with a key
• State v. Critton
  613 So. 2d 475· Fla.· 1993-02-11 ·cited 2×
  The state does not have the burden to prove that prior convictions have not been pardoned or set aside for habitual offender sentencing; these are affirmative defenses for the defendant. However, the trial court must still make findings regarding these factors if the defendant ra
• State v. van Bryant
  613 So. 2d 474· Fla.· 1993-02-11 ·cited 2×
  The state does not have the burden of proof regarding pardons or set-aside convictions for habitual offender sentencing; these are affirmative defenses for the defendant to raise.
• United States v. Foster
  985 F.2d 466· 9th Cir.· 1993-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prosecutor's questioning of a defendant about her post-arrest silence, despite a timely objection and the court's instruction to answer, violated the Fifth Amendment and was not harmless error, requiring reversal of her conviction.
• United States v. Cannon
  981 F.2d 785· 5th Cir.· 1993-01-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the record was inadequately developed to determine if statements made after invoking the right to counsel were admissible under Edwards v. Arizona, and thus vacated the conviction and remanded for fact-finding.
• United States v. Jones
  982 F.2d 380· 9th Cir.· 1992-12-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a blanket prohibition on recross examination, when new matters are elicited on redirect, violates the Confrontation Clause and is not harmless error if the testimony likely contributed to conviction. The court also found the sentencing judge lacked sufficient
• Castillo v. Stainer
  983 F.2d 145· 9th Cir.· 1992-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in failing to follow proper procedures for shackling the defendant, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the restraints were not visible to the jury and did not impede the defendant's ability to communicate with
• Clessie Riles v. State
  613 So. 2d 479· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-22 ·cited 2×
  Clessie Riles appealed his cocaine sale conviction, challenging the trial court's admission of undisclosed post-arrest statements through rebuttal witnesses and a flight instruction. The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the tri
• United States v. Zillges
  978 F.2d 369· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the district court abused its discretion by failing to conduct a thorough inquiry into the defendant's request for new counsel, this error was harmless because the defendant failed to demonstrate that his attorney's performance was deficient or prejudici
• Van Williams v. State
  608 So. 2d 864· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-10-21 ·cited 2×
• Daniels v. State
  606 So. 2d 482· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-10-16 ·cited 2×
  Randy Lee Daniels was convicted by jury of petty theft of school equipment based in part on inadmissible hearsay testimony from an anonymous informant. The Florida appellate court reversed the conviction, finding that the detailed out-of-court accusatory statements exceeded the b
• Hays v. A.J. Arave
  977 F.2d 475· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prisoner waived his right to be present at sentencing by impeding efforts to procure his presence and failing to exhaust remedies under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD).
• United States v. Brumel-Alvarez
  991 F.2d 1452· 9th Cir.· 1992-09-29 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge would not find reversible error in withholding portions of the Levine Memorandum, concluding the information was not sufficiently material or prejudicial.
• Tinsley v. Kuhlmann
  973 F.2d 163· 2d Cir.· 1992-08-26 ·cited 2×
  Any violation of Tinsley's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation or Brady rights was harmless error because there is no reasonable probability that disclosure of the officer's disciplinary records would have changed the trial outcome.
• United States v. Peay
  972 F.2d 71· 4th Cir.· 1992-08-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's error in denying a party the opportunity to impeach a witness was harmless because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming.
• United States v. Hudson
  970 F.2d 948· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-22 ·cited 2×
  The court is bound by prior panel precedent (Barrett) despite disagreement with its reasoning regarding impeachment evidence foundation.
• Hadley Watson v. State
  603 So. 2d 22· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-07-15 ·cited 2×
  Watson was convicted of carrying a concealed firearm after the trial court admitted hearsay testimony from a neighbor's statements to police during cross-examination. The appellate court reversed, holding that the neighbor's statement was inadmissible hearsay because it was not m
• Shelton v. State
  603 So. 2d 10· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-07-08 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Span
  970 F.2d 573· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury instructions were not plain error, the denial of the motion to dismiss for destroyed evidence was not clearly erroneous, and the Jencks Act and Brady violations did not merit reversal.
• Maxwell v. State
  603 So. 2d 490· Fla.· 1992-06-25 ·cited 2×
  Chester Levon Maxwell appeals his death sentence, claiming the trial court committed a Hitchcock error by failing to properly consider and weigh nonstatutory mitigating evidence during the penalty phase. The Florida Supreme Court vacates the death sentence and remands for a new p
• United States v. Thomas
  964 F.2d 836· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's tendered jury instruction was not a correct statement of the law and that any error in admitting other crimes evidence was harmless. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Nollie Lee Martin v. Singletary
  599 So. 2d 119· Fla.· 1992-05-05 ·cited 2×
  Nollie Martin, a death row inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief and appealed the denial of his postconviction motion, seeking to stay his execution based on the U.S. Supreme Court's grant of certiorari in a related case. The Florida Supreme Court denied all relief, finding
• Cabral v. Sullivan
  961 F.2d 998· 1st Cir.· 1992-04-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that allowing alternate jurors to deliberate with the regular jury over counsel's objection constitutes clear error and warrants a new trial, as it violates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 47 and Local Rule 48.1.