Harmless Error Doctrine

1,384 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

• Johnson v. State
  205 So. 3d 1285· Fla.· 2016-12-01 ·cited 10×·via Chapman Harmless Error Test
  The Florida Supreme Court vacated Paul Johnson's death sentences because the jury that recommended death did not unanimously find the facts necessary to impose capital punishment, violating the requirements of Ring v. Arizona and Hurst v. Florida. The court remanded for a new pen
• Rivera v. State
  180 So. 3d 1195· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-12-11 ·cited 10×·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  The appellate court held that the trial court's error in prohibiting evidence of the defendant's lack of a prior criminal record to support his subjective entrapment defense was not harmless.
• Lindsay v. State
  1 So. 3d 270· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-01-09 ·cited 10×
  Lindsay appeals his 15-year minimum mandatory sentence under Florida's 10/20/Life statute, arguing the trial court erred by failing to submit the question of actual firearm possession to the jury. The First District Court of Appeal affirms the sentence under harmless error analys
• Sosa-Valdez v. State
  785 So. 2d 633· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-05-02 ·cited 10×·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  Pedro Sosa-Valdez and Roberto Barrios were convicted of armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, and burglary. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed their convictions because the lead detective improperly testified on rebuttal that the defendants were guilty by opining the
• Mohn v. State
  723 So. 2d 873· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-12-09 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  David Mohn appealed his sentencing for felon in possession of a firearm, challenging the trial court's inclusion of 18 additional points for firearm possession on his guidelines scoresheet. The Florida Supreme Court's decision in White v. State resolved the issue in Mohn's favor,
• Deana A. Dessanti and Arnold Blair Dale v. Contreras
  695 So. 2d 845· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-06-18 ·cited 10×
  While W.R. Grace & Co. v. Waters requires bifurcation of the determination of the amount of punitive damages from the issues of negligence, compensatory damages, and liability for punitive damages, the trial court's failure to bifurcate was harmless error under these facts becaus
• Dayle Shaffer v. State
  619 So. 2d 409· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-06-02 ·cited 10×
  Dayle Shaffer was convicted of armed robbery, but the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial due to cumulative errors: admission of hearsay from a BOLO describing suspects and testimony about a non-testifying witness's identification of the appellan
• United States v. Harrison-Philpot
  978 F.2d 1520· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-28 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the district court's failure to adopt the presentence report or tie its sentence to the Guidelines requires vacating the sentence and remanding for resentencing. It also found certain evidentiary errors to be harmless.
• Deparvine v. State
  603 So. 2d 679· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-08-18 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  William Deparvine appealed his grand theft sentence after being convicted by jury. The court found that the sentencing guidelines scoresheet contained a calculation error that reduced the recommended sentencing range by two cells, requiring vacation of the sentence and remand for
• D.R. v. State
  588 So. 2d 327· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-11-06 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Review
  D.R., a juvenile charged with aggravated battery, appeals after the trial court refused to conduct a Richardson hearing to evaluate alleged discovery violations when the state attempted to elicit testimony about a prior police statement that had not been disclosed to the defense.
• United States v. Shenker
  933 F.2d 61· 1st Cir.· 1991-05-10 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Analysis (Kotteakos V. United States)
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting the insurance broker license application forms as evidence of intent and consciousness of guilt, and that any error in jury instructions was harmless.
• Hennessy v. Goldsmith
  929 F.2d 511· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 10×
  The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of habeas corpus, holding that the state trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the 'voluntary release' element of kidnapping was harmless error.
• United States v. Bachynsky
  924 F.2d 561· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-13 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Standard
  A district court's complete failure to inform a defendant of the possibility of supervised release, when the defendant is ultimately sentenced to supervised release, mandates vacating the sentence and allowing the defendant to plead anew, regardless of harmless error.
• United States v. Brown
  921 F.2d 1304· D.C. Cir.· 1990-12-28 ·cited 10×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony was harmless error, and the sentence enhancement was valid due to substantial compliance with statutory filing requirements.
• Blair v. Armontrout
  916 F.2d 1310· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-24 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the state court's factual finding that no deal existed between the prosecutor and a key witness was supported by the record and thus presumed correct, meaning no knowing use of perjured testimony occurred. The court also held that the defendant's waiver of Mir
• United States v. Sullivan
  911 F.2d 2· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict on all counts.
• In re Cont'l Airlines Corp. v. Cont'l Airlines, Inc.
  901 F.2d 1259· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-25 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The dissenting judge would allow striking employees to recover damages representing the difference between contract rates and reduced rates paid by the employer after repudiation.
• United States v. Stumpf
  900 F.2d 842· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-11 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that a defendant's Rule 35(a) motion, treated as a collateral attack, could not establish an illegal sentence based on a failure to warn about restitution when the restitution amount was less than potential fines and the promissory note was a pre-existing civil obl
• Anderson v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  887 F.2d 630· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-07 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the Administrative Law Judge's (AU) denial of disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and free from legal error, including the proper application of legal standards for pain and the use of the Medical Vocational Guidelines.
• Gilbert v. State
  547 So. 2d 246· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-07-19 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  James Gilbert was convicted of possession and sale of cocaine and sentenced to 30 months in prison. He appealed on grounds of trial court error in allowing a confidential informant to testify as rebuttal evidence and prosecutorial misconduct. The Florida District Court of Appeal
• Harris v. Lt. Dennis R. Davis
  874 F.2d 461· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of inflammatory evidence in a prisoner civil rights case was not harmless error, as it prejudiced the plaintiff's credibility.
• United States v. Larrazolo
  869 F.2d 1354· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-17 ·cited 10×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the appellants failed to demonstrate actual prejudice from the alleged prosecutorial misconduct before the grand jury, and therefore, the indictment stands.
• Freeman v. State
  538 So. 2d 936· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the cumulative effect of admitting testimony regarding the defendant's silence, prior unrecorded drug-related conversation, and a confidential informant's fear of testifying prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial.
• United States v. Chandler
  858 F.2d 254· 5th Cir.· 1988-10-11 ·cited 10×
• Cook v. State
  531 So. 2d 1369· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-09-27 ·cited 10×
  Appellant was convicted of five counts of sexual battery on a child. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that physical evidence was lawfully seized pursuant to consent and that hearsay statements by the child victim, admitted under a Florida statute providing rel
• United States v. Gallo
  859 F.2d 1078· 2d Cir.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The inadvertent inclusion of a small portion of a defendant's prior immunized testimony in an application for electronic surveillance, which did not influence the decision to seek or issue the surveillance order, constitutes harmless error and does not require dismissal of the in
• United States v. SAA
  859 F.2d 1067· 2d Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the district court erred in precluding alibi testimony and refusing to disclose the informant's identity to one defendant, these errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the prosecutor's argument regarding the uncalled informant was also impro
• Zackary Rogers v. Lynaugh
  848 F.2d 606· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-30 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the prosecutor's argument to the jury, suggesting they allocate ten years for each prior conviction in addition to the current offense, constituted constitutional error under the Double Jeopardy Clause, and this error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
• Leif Tollefson v. State
  525 So. 2d 957· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-05-11 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Leif Tollefson appeals his convictions for manslaughter, DUI-manslaughter, leaving the scene of accidents, DUI-property damage, and resisting an officer with violence. The appellate court found harmless error in the admission of prior DUI evidence and the jury instruction limitin
• Fiandaca v. Cunningham
  827 F.2d 825· 1st Cir.· 1987-08-25 ·cited 10×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to disqualify counsel due to a conflict of interest, but affirmed the finding of liability on equal protection grounds, remanding only for a new determination of the remedy.
• United States v. Nichols
  808 F.2d 660· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the admission of extrinsic evidence of prior drug transactions was questionable under Rule 404(b), any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Other evidentiary rulings were affirmed.
• Duncan Peder McKENZIE, Jr. v. Risley
  801 F.2d 1519· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Sandstrom error on the element of intent is subject to harmless error analysis and that the death penalty statutes were constitutional. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Stone v. Green
  796 F.2d 1366· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-14 ·cited 10×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the erroneous introduction of prior conviction evidence, even if resulting from a denial of severance, was constitutionally harmless given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Collatos
  798 F.2d 18· 1st Cir.· 1986-08-12 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the materiality of a false statement in a perjury case is a question of law, not fact, and that any prosecutorial comment on the defendant's silence was harmless error.
• State v. Thornton
  491 So. 2d 1143· Fla.· 1986-07-17 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a murder conviction where the trial judge admitted testimony that the defendant had exercised his right to remain silent after a Miranda warning. The court found the officer's statement was error under Florida's 'fairly susceptible' standard for
• Rousseau v. State
  489 So. 2d 828· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-05-30 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that when a sentencing court departs from guidelines based on reasons prohibited by State v. Mischler, an appellate court cannot apply the harmless error rule; reversal is mandated.
• Manny Malonzo Cortez v. State
  488 So. 2d 163· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-05-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion for acquittal on the cannabis possession count, but affirmed the sentence departure and the denial of the mistrial motion.
• United States v. Sosa
  789 F.2d 1257· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-01 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the district court's failure to comply with Fed.R.Crim.P. 32 regarding the review and resolution of presentence investigation reports constituted a violation requiring resentencing.
• Nicholson v. State
  486 So. 2d 688· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-04-15 ·cited 10×
  Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for sexual battery of a child, finding that trial errors including inadmissible similar crimes testimony and prosecutorial misconduct were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Wolf
  787 F.2d 1094· 7th Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the jury's verdict was supported by substantial evidence and that alleged trial errors were harmless.
• Griffin v. Martin
  785 F.2d 1172· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-27 ·cited 10×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court affirmed the result based on prior precedent, finding that contradictory jury instructions on self-defense rendered the trial fundamentally unfair.
• McNEIL v. Cuyler
  782 F.2d 443· 3d Cir.· 1986-02-04 ·cited 10×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the majority misapplied the Strickland standard for ineffective assistance of counsel, thereby increasing the burden on petitioners and wrongly changing the outcome of the case.
• Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Vosburgh
  480 So. 2d 140· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-12-11 ·cited 10×
  In this personal injury appeal, the court affirmed liability findings but reversed the damages award of $696,483 because the plaintiff's testimony regarding starting salaries for stewardesses, teachers, and interpreters was inadmissible hearsay that formed the basis for a substan
• United States v. Oswald Campbell
  774 F.2d 354· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony about the April 1st theft, and any prosecutorial misconduct was harmless error.
• United States v. Conover
  772 F.2d 765· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-30 ·cited 10×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the defendants' conspiracy to defraud Seminole Electric, a recipient of federal loan assistance, did not violate 18 U.S.C. § 371 because Seminole Electric was not a federal agency or performing a federal function.
• State v. Alonza Rowell
  476 So. 2d 149· Fla.· 1985-08-29 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a district court decision that had vacated Rowell's burglary and theft convictions based on an alleged improper comment on his right to remain silent. The Court held that the officer's fragmented and incomplete statement, when considered in full
• Margarito Alfaro v. State
  471 So. 2d 1345· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-06-26 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a manslaughter by drunken driving conviction because the state failed to disclose an accident reconstruction expert opinion from the county medical examiner before trial, and the trial court erred in admitting the evidence without cond
• Delvaux v. Ford Motor Co.
  764 F.2d 469· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-12 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that a convertible automobile is not unreasonably dangerous as a matter of law due to its design, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's request to interview jurors.
• United States v. Smeaton
  762 F.2d 796· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-06 ·cited 10×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the defendant's bail jumping conviction was supported by sufficient evidence of willfulness and that an erroneous jury instruction on insanity was harmless error. The court affirmed the conviction.
• Johnson v. Crispus C. NIX
  763 F.2d 344· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that any error in admitting incriminating statements was harmless and that the defendant's other claims regarding a fair trial and jury impartiality were without merit.