Harmless Error Doctrine

1,383 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,569 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Riley v. The United States
  608 F.2d 441· Ct. Cl.· 1979-09-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiff's nonselection for promotion was unlawful due to prejudicial errors in his record, entitling him to back pay, reinstatement, and correction of his military records.
• United States v. Williams
  605 F.2d 495· 10th Cir.· 1979-07-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial judge did not commit prejudicial error or abuse his discretion in admitting identification testimony, rebuttal testimony, or in denying a new trial based on alleged sequestration violations.
• Pollard v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
  598 F.2d 1284· 3d Cir.· 1979-05-08 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The Federal Rules of Evidence govern the admissibility of documentary evidence in federal diversity cases, and the trial judge's limitation on admitting documents was not manifestly erroneous.
• United States v. Gilliland
  586 F.2d 1384· 10th Cir.· 1978-11-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a defendant's prior convictions, some over 30 years old, during cross-examination of a defense witness was improper and constituted plain error.
• United States v. Garle A. Whitson
  587 F.2d 948· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that sworn denials on cross-examination open the door to otherwise Miranda-barred statements for impeachment purposes, as the privilege against self-incrimination does not protect perjury.
• DELTA AIR Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  564 F.2d 592· D.C. Cir.· 1977-09-21 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the Civil Aeronautics Board's decision to award a new air route to Eastern Air Lines, finding the decision supported by substantial evidence and a rational basis.
• Stimack v. State OF Tex. & W. J. Estelle, Jr.
  548 F.2d 588· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-11 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that juror testimony about extraneous influences is admissible to impeach a verdict, and the errors were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Guidry
  534 F.2d 1220· 6th Cir.· 1976-04-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the initial entry by an agent posing as a helper was permissible under the Fourth Amendment, and the subsequent warrantless search of the home was justified by exigent circumstances to prevent the destruction of evidence.
• United States v. Jones
  534 F.2d 1344· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that any errors or misconduct by the government or trial court were harmless.
• United States v. Partin
  524 F.2d 992· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-12 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Rule
  A contemnor of a Boys Markets injunction does not have a constitutional or statutory right to a jury trial, even if the underlying statute is § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act.
• United States v. Lindsay
  506 F.2d 166· D.C. Cir.· 1974-10-07 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Constitutional Error
  The court held that the police entry into the motel room was unconstitutional because it was not justified by exigent circumstances, consent, hot pursuit, or as a search incident to arrest, and therefore the evidence seized was inadmissible.
• United States v. Greiser
  502 F.2d 1295· 9th Cir.· 1974-09-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the evidence against both appellants was sufficient to support their convictions and that no reversible error occurred during their trials.
• Knight v. State
  294 So. 2d 387· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-05-17 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Rule
  Knight was convicted of three crimes: grand larceny and breaking and entering a concrete company (Counts 1-2) and breaking and entering a gasoline service station (Count 3). The appellate court affirmed the convictions on Counts 1 and 2 but reversed Count 3 due to insufficient ev
• Souza v. Howard
  488 F.2d 462· 1st Cir.· 1973-11-27 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Rule
• United States v. Willis
  482 F.2d 1034· 8th Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's admission of certain cross-examination evidence and the handling of a witness's Fifth Amendment invocation, while potentially questionable, constituted harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt and did not prejudice the defendant's right to a
• Rudd v. State
  477 F.2d 805· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-23 ·cited 18×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the introduction of identification testimony stemming from unconstitutional pretrial lineups, show-ups, and photo displays was error, warranting habeas corpus relief.
• United States v. McCARTHY
  470 F.2d 222· 6th Cir.· 1972-11-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of irrelevant and prejudicial testimony concerning an unrelated arrest was not reversible error in a bench trial, as the judge is presumed to have disregarded it if sufficient competent evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Augello
  452 F.2d 1135· 2d Cir.· 1971-12-17 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict and that any errors, such as the admission of questionable reputation testimony or the delay in trial, were harmless.
• Downey v. Peyton
  451 F.2d 236· 4th Cir.· 1971-11-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that while the mention of the defendant's silence at arrest was error, it was harmless. However, allegations of jury bias and discussion of matters outside the evidence require further factual findings.
• Bruner v. United States
  432 F.2d 931· 10th Cir.· 1970-10-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a defendant is not entitled to a transcript of a mistrial for use in an appeal from a subsequent conviction, nor is counsel automatically required to be furnished one without request.
• United States v. Workcuff
  422 F.2d 700· D.C. Cir.· 1970-01-08 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the absence of a court reporter during a jury instruction, without a complete and accurate transcript, constitutes reversible error requiring a new trial.
• Pinelli v. United States
  403 F.2d 998· 10th Cir.· 1968-11-20 ·cited 18×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that testimony regarding a note found on the appellant was admissible as harmless error, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for mail theft.
• United States ex rel. Danton S. Miller v. Follette
  397 F.2d 363· 2d Cir.· 1968-06-28 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments regarding the defendant's failure to testify and his pro se status were not constitutional errors, or if they were, they were harmless.
• Ganger v. Peyton
  379 F.2d 709· 4th Cir.· 1967-05-30 ·cited 18×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that a federal court should not vacate a state court conviction for ineffective counsel without the prisoner first exhausting state remedies. However, a conviction obtained when the prosecuting attorney had a conflict of interest, representing the victim in a relat
• Dampier v. State
  180 So. 2d 183· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-11-16 ·cited 18×
  Two defendants convicted of first-degree murder in the 1965 shooting death of a store owner during an armed robbery appealed, challenging the admissibility of their confessions under Escobedo v. Illinois and claiming insanity as a defense. The Florida appellate court affirmed the
• Leigh v. United States
  308 F.2d 345· D.C. Cir.· 1962-09-27 ·cited 18×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The admission of a document containing prejudicial information, even if relevant for another purpose, was not harmless error if it may have substantially influenced the jury's verdict.
• Hardy Joseph Owens and John Link Cogdill v. United States
  221 F.2d 351· 5th Cir.· 1955-04-15 ·cited 18×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and the proof did not show a material variance, affirming the convictions because any potential errors did not substantially prejudice the appellants.
• Bailey v. State
  155 Fla. 597· Fla.· 1945-01-09 ·cited 18×
  Leo Bailey challenges his homicide conviction, claiming the trial court erred in allowing a jury summoned from the body of the county (rather than from the jury box), in excluding evidence of prior threats, and in jury instructions. The Florida Supreme Court upholds the convictio
• Keller v. Brooklyn Bus Corp.
  128 F.2d 510· 2d Cir.· 1942-05-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a subsequent correct jury instruction cured any prior error regarding the burden of proof for contributory negligence.
• Prior v. Pounds
  113 Fla. 308· Fla.· 1933-12-19 ·cited 18×
  A police officer recovering a judgment for injuries from a hit-and-run accident challenged jury instructions regarding pedestrian and motorist duties on public streets. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that while the jury instructions were abstract, they c
• L. B. McLeod Constr. Co. v. Kemp
  101 Fla. 441· Fla.· 1931-05-04 ·cited 18×
  This case concerns a personal injury lawsuit where the appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment. The key issues involved the sufficiency of a contributory negligence plea and whether the general issue plea admitted agency. The court found no reversible error.
• Driggers v. State
  90 Fla. 324· Fla.· 1925-10-09 ·cited 18×
  Driggers was convicted of fraudulently altering animal marks with intent to claim ownership under Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding the evidence legally sufficient and no material errors in the trial proceedings.
• Shuler v. State
  84 Fla. 414· Fla.· 1922-08-19 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a criminal conviction, holding that procedural errors do not warrant reversal unless they injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party.
• Shana Barnes v. State
  970 So. 2d 332· Fla.· 2007-11-29 ·cited 17×·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a written transcript of a defendant's prior trial testimony cannot be admitted as an exhibit and provided to a jury during deliberations after being read aloud at trial, because such testimonial evidence would receive undue emphasis and implica
• Mogavero v. State
  744 So. 2d 1048· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-08-25 ·cited 17×
  Joseph Mogavero appeals his convictions for acting as a mortgage broker without a license and collecting advance fees as a loan broker. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reverses the mortgage broker convictions because the trial court improperly instructed the jury on the menta
• Jackson v. State
  702 So. 2d 607· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-12-12 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Rule
• Carter v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg.
  633 So. 2d 3· Fla.· 1994-01-20 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The Florida Supreme Court held that violations of statutory time limits in professional disciplinary proceedings under section 455.225 are subject to the harmless error rule, requiring a licensee seeking dismissal to prove that delays prejudiced the fairness of proceedings rather
• United States v. Willie
  941 F.2d 1384· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-12 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court erred in excluding exhibits offered by the defendant to support his subjective belief that he was not subject to tax laws, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Shearn Moody, Jr.
  903 F.2d 321· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court erred by prohibiting the impeachment of hearsay declarants and by denying the defendant an opportunity for surrebuttal testimony, requiring reversal and remand.
• Sanchez v. Eloy Mondragon
  858 F.2d 1462· 10th Cir.· 1988-10-06 ·cited 17×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the trial court's inquiry into the defendant's decision to waive counsel and proceed pro se was inadequate, violating his Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
• United States v. Rodriguez-Suarez
  856 F.2d 135· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-28 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act are constitutional and apply to all defendants, and that individual claims regarding jury selection, prosecutorial comments, and jury instructions
• Mays v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D.
  837 F.2d 1362· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the district court did not err in affirming the Secretary's decision to deny social security disability payments, as substantial evidence supported the finding that the claimant could perform sedentary work.
• Briggs v. State
  455 So. 2d 519· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-08-17 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Rule
  Freddie Briggs was convicted of second-degree murder with a firearm after a jury trial. On appeal, he challenged his conviction based on prosecutorial misconduct involving attacks on defense counsel's integrity, but the court affirmed under the harmless error rule while strongly
• United States v. DiMATTEO
  716 F.2d 1361· 11th Cir.· 1983-10-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that admitting extrinsic evidence solely to attack a witness's credibility, in violation of Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b), was an error that was not harmless.
• United States v. West
  680 F.2d 652· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-01 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the prosecutor's improper argument, which exploited the influence of her office to bolster a witness's credibility, constituted reversible error, even without a timely objection.
• United States v. Carter
  619 F.2d 293· 3d Cir.· 1980-04-25 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Deviations from Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in accepting a guilty plea constitute reversible error if they affect substantial rights, requiring vacation of the sentence.
• Henderson v. Lane
  613 F.2d 175· 7th Cir.· 1980-01-21 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the substitution of an alternate juror after deliberations began, while a constitutional error due to the defendant's absence, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The conviction stands.
• Harris v. Spears
  606 F.2d 639· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-16 ·cited 17×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the district court correctly granted the writ of habeas corpus, finding that the defendant's procedural defaults were excused by cause and prejudice, and not a deliberate bypass of state procedures.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Testamark
  570 F.2d 1162· 3d Cir.· 1978-01-10 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the police department's failure to preserve a blood sample, while a violation of due process, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt given the defendant's own testimony supporting his competence.
• Sylvester v. State
  341 So. 2d 203· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-02-11 ·cited 17×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a criminal conviction because the prosecutor improperly elicited testimony about the defendant's exercise of his right to remain silent without establishing a predicate for such evidence. The court certified a question to the Florida S