Harmless Error Analysis

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

• Cook v. State
  548 So. 2d 257· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-07-20 ·cited 2×
  The court should reverse the conviction because the use of a screen between the defendant and child witnesses violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights.
• J.P. v. State
  546 So. 2d 753· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-07-11 ·cited 2×
  J.P., a juvenile, appealed a delinquency adjudication for trespassing on school property after the trial court admitted evidence of a prior attack on a teacher. The appellate court reversed, holding that the evidence was inadmissible character evidence that was highly prejudicial
• United States v. Brown
  878 F.2d 222· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the seizure of the defendant's letter was justified by a legitimate governmental interest in inmate safety and that even if improperly admitted, its admission was harmless error.
• Dobson v. State
  542 So. 2d 1047· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-05-02 ·cited 2×
  The admission of a codefendant's confession was harmless error because there was ample evidence to support the conviction independently. The denial of the motion for post-conviction relief was also affirmed.
• Egil Ingvaldsen v. State
  539 So. 2d 613· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-03-22 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for soliciting murder of judges, finding that any prejudicial admission of prior bad acts evidence was harmless error given the defendant's detailed voluntary confession and corroborating witness testimony.
• Doutre v. State
  539 So. 2d 569· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-03-09 ·cited 2×
  Sean Doutre appealed his convictions for first-degree premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit murder, arguing that juror misconduct—specifically a juror's unauthorized use of a pocket dictionary during deliberations—entitled him to a new trial. The appellate court affirmed h
• Valentino Williams v. State
  539 So. 2d 563· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of a portion of the defendant's statement regarding prior arrests and probation, made during Miranda advisement, was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
• Benfils George v. State
  539 So. 2d 21· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-03-02 ·cited 2×
  Conviction reversed due to prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument, including expressing personal confidence in witness credibility, attacking defendant's truthfulness based on national origin, commenting on failure to produce witnesses, and making insinuations about pri
• Sims v. Sullivan
  867 F.2d 142· 2d Cir.· 1989-02-06 ·cited 2×
  An in-court identification, even if uncertain, does not violate due process when pretrial identification procedures were not unduly suggestive and other evidence of guilt is ample.
• United States v. Jackson Rip Holmes
  863 F.2d 4· 2d Cir.· 1988-12-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district judge's error in not consulting counsel before denying a jury's request for testimony readback was harmless. The court also found the jury instructions regarding the "threat" element were not erroneous.
• United States v. DOE
  862 F.2d 776· 9th Cir.· 1988-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government's egregious violations of a juvenile's statutory rights, including notification and arraignment, warranted dismissal of the charges.
• Frison v. State
  533 So. 2d 954· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-11-23 ·cited 2×
• Thurman Dickey v. Lewis
  859 F.2d 1365· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a jury instruction presuming intent to kill from the use of a deadly weapon, while unconstitutional, constituted harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of intent. The court also affirmed that no state procedural bar precluded federal review.
• Rudolph v. Parke
  856 F.2d 738· 6th Cir.· 1988-09-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of three invalid prior convictions was harmless error because the petitioner had sufficient valid prior convictions to support his persistent felony offender status, and thus, habeas relief was not warranted.
• The People of the Territory of Guam v. Cepeda
  851 F.2d 1564· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the improper admission of nonexpert handwriting testimony was not harmless error and required reversal of the conviction.
• LePAGE v. State OF Idaho & Arvon J. Arave
  851 F.2d 251· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a Massiah violation was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming independent evidence of guilt, and that other claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and due process violations were without merit or procedurally barred.
• United States v. Freidin
  849 F.2d 716· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a memorandum was inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence 803(6) because it was not shown to have been made pursuant to a regular practice of the business, even if it possessed indicia of trustworthiness.
• Gov't OF the Virgin Islands v. Martinez
  847 F.2d 125· 3d Cir.· 1988-06-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a Spanish-speaking attorney, refusing to compel informant identity disclosure, allowing a transcript of a tape recording to be used by the jury, and that the admission of testimony regarding prior unch
• Roman v. State
  528 So. 2d 1169· Fla.· 1988-05-19 ·cited 2×
  Ernest Lee Roman, sentenced to death for first-degree murder of a two-year-old child, appeals the denial of post-conviction relief. The Florida Supreme Court vacates his conviction and death sentence and remands for a new trial based on the state's failure to disclose exculpatory
• Alexander v. Foltz
  838 F.2d 140· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that erroneous jury instructions regarding the presumption of intent and implied malice were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, entitling the petitioner to a new trial.
• Jeffers v. Leeke
  835 F.2d 522· 4th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while comments on a defendant's post-arrest silence may violate Doyle v. Ohio, such errors are harmless if the defendant consistently maintained an accident defense, and there is no reasonable probability that the outcome would have differed absent the comment
• Cabreriza v. State
  517 So. 2d 51· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-12-08 ·cited 2×
  David Cabreriza appeals his convictions for first-degree murder, armed robbery, and armed burglary following a jury verdict. The Florida appellate court affirmed, finding no error in permitting cross-examination regarding stolen jewelry and concluding that denial of a brief attor
• Spence v. State
  515 So. 2d 312· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-11-04 ·cited 2×
  Vincent Spence was convicted of second-degree murder for fatally shooting an unarmed victim during a street altercation. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence that Spence's conduct was eminently dangerous and evinced a depraved m
• Major Melvin Johnson v. R.M. Muncy
  830 F.2d 508· 4th Cir.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Virginia Supreme Court's shift in procedural rules regarding habeas corpus review, as established in Slayton v. Parrigan, does not bar the petitioner from seeking federal habeas corpus relief in this case. However, the case is remanded for a harmless error
• Barry v. State
  504 So. 2d 524· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-03-26 ·cited 2×
  A prosecutor's comment on a defendant's failure to testify is harmless error if the state can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict.
• Ingraham v. State
  502 So. 2d 987· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-02-17 ·cited 2×
  Samuel Ingraham appeals his felony conviction and challenges the use of prior juvenile adjudications in his sentencing guidelines calculation. The court reverses due to reversible error in the trial court's ex parte interrogation of jurors regarding whether they witnessed the def
• United States v. Harris
  814 F.2d 155· 4th Cir.· 1987-02-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's technical violation of Fed.R.Crim.P. 43(a) was harmless error and that the defendant's counsel's failure to request a witness list during voir dire waived that issue.
• Woratzeck v. Ricketts
  808 F.2d 1322· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-16 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Priority Prods., Inc.
  793 F.2d 296· Fed. Cir.· 1986-06-16 ·cited 2×
  The failure to name corporate officers in their individual capacities in administrative pre-penalty and penalty notices does not deprive the Court of International Trade of subject matter jurisdiction, nor does it violate due process if the officers had actual or constructive not
• United States v. Dollard
  780 F.2d 1118· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by refusing to allow the defendant to testify outside the jury's presence regarding the voluntariness of his confession, which constitutes reversible error. However, the indictment under 18 U.S.C. § 1709 was proper.
• United States v. Chung Yup YUM
  776 F.2d 490· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the validity of a marriage is immaterial to a conspiracy charge involving false statements to the INS, and jury instructions on sham marriages were proper.
• Erineo Acensio v. State
  477 So. 2d 38· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-10-18 ·cited 2×
  Erineo Acensio appeals his conviction for aggravated battery with a firearm, raising two issues: the denial of his motion to suppress his confession and the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of battery. The appellate court affirmed the conv
• Courtney v. State
  476 So. 2d 301· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-10-09 ·cited 2×
  Darrell Courtney appeals his first-degree murder conviction for killing a fellow inmate. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court erroneously excluded impeachment testimony by Eugene Adams that contradicted the state's key eyewitness
• Busby v. Holt
  771 F.2d 1461· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prosecutor's misconduct in calling a witness who intended to invoke the Fifth Amendment, and the trial court's error in permitting this, constituted a constitutional violation that was not harmless error.
• Andres v. State
  468 So. 2d 1084· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-05-14 ·cited 2×
  Conviction reversed because prosecutor's closing argument was susceptible to being interpreted as referring to defendant's failure to testify, a constitutional error requiring reversal even if harmless.
• United States v. Leocadio Figueroa
  750 F.2d 232· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding telephone conversations, which constituted inadmissible hearsay and violated the Confrontation Clause, was prejudicial error requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Houser
  746 F.2d 55· D.C. Cir.· 1984-10-19 ·cited 2×
  The Court held that the BATF tracer form 7520.5 was inadmissible hearsay and its admission was prejudicial error, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• Brown v. State
  452 So. 2d 122· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-06-08 ·cited 2×
  Brown appeals his convictions for grand theft and possession of cannabis, challenging the trial court's admission of polygraph examination results and related testimony. The court reverses, holding that the documents Brown signed did not constitute a valid stipulation to admit po
• United States v. Prows
  728 F.2d 1398· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for severance and that the admission of co-conspirator statements was not reversible error. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Wilton Allen Dedge v. State
  442 So. 2d 429· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by improperly disqualifying a defense expert and admitting hearsay evidence related to the reliability of a dog scent lineup.
• United States v. Guyon
  717 F.2d 1536· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on a lesser-included offense was error, and this error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Neville Bruce Thompson
  716 F.2d 248· 4th Cir.· 1983-08-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that admitting the privileged statements of the defendant's wife into evidence was reversible error, and the error was not harmless.
• Quevedo v. State
  436 So. 2d 87· Fla.· 1983-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied Quevedo's petition for review, holding that he failed to establish a clear and direct conflict between the district court's affirmation of his conviction and the prior Wilson v. State decision regarding improper joinder of defendants in criminal t
• United States v. Crowder
  691 F.2d 280· 6th Cir.· 1982-10-21 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Magouirk
  680 F.2d 108· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that even though a prosecutor failed to correct false testimony, the conviction would not be overturned if there was no reasonable likelihood the false testimony affected the jury's judgment.
• Dunsford v. State
  399 So. 2d 91· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-05-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while giving an instruction on the unexplained possession of recently stolen goods based solely on accomplice testimony was improper, the error was harmless. The court also held that the instruction did not violate the Fifth Amendment rights of the accused and
• Fuiavailili Tapua ALO v. Antone Olim
  639 F.2d 466· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination of the defendant regarding his post-arrest silence, after receiving Miranda warnings, violated his due process rights.
• Withers v. United States
  602 F.2d 124· 6th Cir.· 1979-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct involving racial comments during closing arguments constituted reversible error, requiring vacation of the denial of the motion to vacate sentence.
• Elliott v. Thompson
  599 F.2d 767· 6th Cir.· 1979-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the confession voluntary and any Bruton Rule violation to be harmless error.
• Burkhart v. Stoney Lane
  591 F.2d 333· 6th Cir.· 1979-04-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's redacted confession was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, despite violating the Bruton rule.