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

• Mills v. Tex. Comp. Ins. Co.
  220 F.2d 942· 5th Cir.· 1955-04-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the husband's prior unrelated compensation claims was prejudicial and reversible error.
• In re Barret's Estate
  40 So. 2d 125· Fla.· 1949-01-21 ·cited 10×
  In this probate dispute, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of the executor of the first will's petition to revoke the probate of a second will and probate the first will instead, while allowing the church as a legatee under the first will to pursue revocation of the
• Lancaster v. United States
  153 F.2d 718· 1st Cir.· 1946-02-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the local board's classification was not arbitrary or capricious, and any procedural errors were harmless. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
• United States v. Bennett
  152 F.2d 342· 2d Cir.· 1945-11-15 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge argues that the trial court's jury instructions were prejudicially erroneous, potentially confusing the jury regarding the burden of proof for theft within a conspiracy charge.
• Morris v. Dist. of Columbia
  124 F.2d 284· D.C. Cir.· 1941-12-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the exclusion of character evidence and liability insurance information, and the denial of a subpoena for witness statements, were not prejudicial errors requiring reversal.
• Lewis v. State
  84 Fla. 466· Fla.· 1922-10-24 ·cited 10×
  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.
• Crane v. State
  76 Fla. 236· Fla.· 1918-08-12 ·cited 10×
  James E. Crane, a trustee of county bonds in Hillsborough County, was convicted of embezzling county funds. On writ of error, Crane challenged whether a county bond trustee qualifies as a county officer under the embezzlement statute, but the Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holdi
• Bell v. State
  65 Fla. 505· Fla.· 1913-06-09 ·cited 10×
  Alexander Bell was convicted under Florida law for deserting his wife and child without legal grounds and withholding means of support from them. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting various claims of evidentiary and instructional error.
• Granville Ritchie v. State
  344 So. 3d 369· Fla.· 2022-06-09 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Granville Ritchie was convicted of first-degree murder, sexual battery of a child under twelve, and aggravated child abuse in connection with the rape and murder of a nine-year-old girl left in his care, and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed all convictions and the death sentenc
• Davis v. State
  332 So. 3d 970· Fla.· 2021-12-02 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  A trial court does not violate a defendant's due process or Fifth Amendment rights by considering the defendant's failure to take responsibility when the defendant voluntarily allocutes at sentencing. The statutory maximum sentence in a noncapital case is a legal sentence by virt
• United States v. Renado Smith
  928 F.3d 1215· 11th Cir.· 2019-07-02 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Review
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the convictions of Renado Smith and Richard Delancy for conspiracy to commit alien smuggling and related offenses, holding that the district court did not err in admitting the videotaped deposition testimony of a key witness (Vanessa Armstrong Vixama
• R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Schleider
  273 So. 3d 63· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-12-26 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Review
  R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company appeals a wrongful death judgment in favor of Diane Schleider and her daughter following Andrew Schleider's death from lung cancer and COPD. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District affirms the judgment, holding that the closing arguments
• Baptiste v. State
  179 So. 3d 502· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-11-24 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Review
  Peter Baptiste appealed his convictions for armed robbery and conspiracy to rob, challenging the admission of incriminating statements he made to police. The court reversed because officers misrepresented the law by promising Baptiste he could only be charged with simple robbery
• Williams v. State
  163 So. 3d 694· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-04-29 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Review
  Anthony Williams was convicted after the trial court denied his request to represent himself, finding he lacked legal knowledge and competency. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the trial court applied the wrong legal standard—competency to waive counsel
• Asley Espute v. State
  85 So. 3d 532· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-04-11 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Defendant Espute was convicted of aggravated battery and battery arising from a violent altercation. On appeal, he challenged the trial court's denial of his mistrial motion based on the prosecutor's improper comment on his right to remain silent. The Fourth District Court of App
• Morris v. State
  988 So. 2d 120· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-07-25 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments during closing argument improperly shifted the burden of proof and commented on the defendant's right to remain silent, requiring reversal.
• Williamson v. State
  894 So. 2d 996· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-01-07 ·cited 9×·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for mistrial because any error in sending unadmitted prior conviction documents to the jury was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Kimbrough v. State
  852 So. 2d 335· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-08-08 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the erroneous admission of behavioral records was harmless error because the same information was presented through other evidence and expert testimony.
• Brown v. Dugger
  831 F.2d 1547· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-13 ·cited 9×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that limiting cross-examination into a witness's potential deal with the state violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
• Brownlee v. State
  478 So. 2d 467· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-11-13 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for severance because the codefendants' confessions were sufficiently interlocking and admissible under Parker v. Randolph, and any error was harmless.
• Kane v. State
  473 So. 2d 786· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-08-07 ·cited 9×
  Florida appellate court affirmed probation revocation for failure to pay mandated costs, striking improper findings based on violations alleged after the probationary term expired.
• United States v. Robinson
  716 F.2d 1095· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-07 ·cited 9×
  A prosecutor's direct comment on a defendant's failure to testify, even if defense counsel 'opens the door,' constitutes reversible error under the Fifth Amendment unless shown to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Stang v. State
  403 So. 2d 542· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-09-02 ·cited 9×·via Harmless Error Rule
  An otherwise valid conviction need not be voided when the state corrects an erroneous date in charging documents by amending the statement of particulars after jeopardy attaches, provided the defendant knew the true date, was afforded an opportunity to cure any prejudice, and the
• McFARLAND v. Smith
  611 F.2d 414· 2d Cir.· 1979-10-29 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in reversing the state court's decision, finding no appeal to racial prejudice in the prosecutor's remarks.
• Carver v. State
  344 So. 2d 1328· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-04-29 ·cited 9×
  Bobby Carver was convicted of lewd and lascivious assault on his 10-year-old daughter. The Florida appellate court reversed his conviction, finding two prejudicial errors: the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on necessarily included lesser offenses (assault and assault
• Peacock v. State
  122 Fla. 25· Fla.· 1935-12-14 ·cited 9×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a judgment granting a peremptory writ of mandamus compelling the City of South Miami to appropriate and pay funds to satisfy a prior judgment rendered against it. The Court rejected the city's appeal as frivolous, applying the rule that appeals
• Horowitz v. Horowitz
  273 So. 3d 263· Fla. 2d DCA· 2019-05-29 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Review
  The trial court erred by imputing income to the former wife effective immediately without allowing time for therapy, and by awarding durational alimony without making specific factual findings regarding the former wife's monthly expenses and the former husband's actual ability to
• Lenz v. State
  245 So. 3d 795· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-04-25 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Review
  The trial court erred in overruling the defense objection to prosecutorial closing argument that impermissibly commented on the defendant's silence during jail calls and shifted the burden of proof. The trial court also erred in denying the peremptory strike of a prospective juro
• Blair v. State
  201 So. 3d 800· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-10-05 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  Glenn Blair appealed his probation revocation sentence, challenging the trial court's assessment of 160 points for sexual penetration on his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that because Blair pled no contest to charges alleging the alter
• Donohue v. State
  979 So. 2d 1058· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-03-26 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  The court held that while the trial court erred in enhancing the sentence without a jury finding or admission, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to clear and uncontested evidence of the victim's vulnerability.
• Smallridge v. State
  904 So. 2d 601· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-06-20 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Eric Smallridge appeals his convictions for two counts of DUI manslaughter, challenging the jury instruction, denial of his motion to suppress blood-alcohol test results, admission of photographs, restitution order, and the constitutionality of Florida's Criminal Punishment Code.
• Food Lion, L.L.C. v. Henderson
  895 So. 2d 1207· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-02-25 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  Food Lion appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to Maria Henderson for injuries sustained by tripping over an unattended merchandise cart in one of its stores. The appellate court affirmed the judgment because Food Lion failed to challenge both theories of liability submitted t
• Miller v. State
  852 So. 2d 904· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-08-13 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  Counsel is ineffective for failing to object to a defendant appearing before the jury in visible restraint devices; such appearance is inherently prejudicial and undermines the presumption of innocence, requiring a hearing on necessity before the devices may be used.
• McQUEEN v. State
  848 So. 2d 1220· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-07-08 ·cited 8×
  A trial court's admission of actuarial evidence in a Jimmy Ryce Act civil commitment proceeding does not warrant reversal if the error is harmless in light of the defendant's admissions and the clinical evidence supporting commitment.
• Wallace v. State
  766 So. 2d 364· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-07-26 ·cited 8×
  Jeffrey Wade Wallace appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and four counts of attempted first-degree murder arising from a shooting at a bar in Key West. The court affirms all convictions, rejecting Wallace's insanity defenses based on the M'Naghten rule and hallucinati
• Johnson v. State
  728 So. 2d 1204· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-03-17 ·cited 8×
  William Johnson petitioned for certiorari review after the appellate division affirmed his DUI conviction, finding harmless error when the trial court excluded a credit card receipt without a proper Richardson hearing. The court granted certiorari, quashed the appellate decision,
• Fonticoba v. State
  725 So. 2d 1244· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-01-27 ·cited 8×·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  Pedro Fonticoba was convicted of second-degree murder in the shooting death of his common-law wife. The court reversed his conviction and remanded for a new trial because the prosecutor violated a pretrial order by informing the jury during opening arguments that Fonticoba had fa
• Nelson v. State
  704 So. 2d 752· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-01-30 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in precluding cross-examination regarding pending civil actions filed by the defendant against the victim, as the probative value was outweighed by the danger of confusion or misleading the jury.
• Jones v. State
  686 So. 2d 749· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-01-10 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the officer's comment on the defendant's right to remain silent was harmless error, but the public defender's lien was improperly imposed.
• Moton v. State
  659 So. 2d 1269· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-08-30 ·cited 8×·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  The Florida appellate court reversed a conviction for armed robbery and ordered a new trial after finding that the trial judge improperly questioned a key prosecution witness in a manner that violated the prohibition against judicial commentary on the weight of evidence and likel
• Douglass v. State
  634 So. 2d 693· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-03-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to properly inform the appellant of his rights when denying his request to discharge appointed counsel.
• Orndorff v. A.L. Lockhart
  998 F.2d 1426· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-15 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the harmless error standard from Chapman v. California applies to this habeas case because the state courts did not have an opportunity to review the constitutional error. The court found the error harmless as to Richley and Holmes, but remanded for further co
• United States v. DeShawn Lee Robinson
  978 F.2d 1554· 10th Cir.· 1992-11-02 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Standard (Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A))
  The court held that admitting gang affiliation evidence as substantive proof of guilt was improper, and that the prosecution breached a plea agreement with a defendant.
• United States v. Lara
  975 F.2d 1120· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying U.S.S.G. § 2J1.7 by analogy to enhance the sentence for an offense committed while on release, as the enhancement is intended for the new crime, not the original one.
• United States v. Hall
  977 F.2d 861· 4th Cir.· 1992-09-29 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  The court held that disparity in sentences imposed on coconspirators is not a valid basis for departure, nor can it be considered in determining the extent of a departure for substantial assistance. The court also held that a conviction for carrying a concealed weapon, committed
• United States v. Johnson
  961 F.2d 1188· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-20 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  The court held that even if the calculation of criminal history points was erroneous, the error was harmless because it did not affect the sentencing range or the sentence imposed.
• Montoya v. Collins
  955 F.2d 279· 5th Cir.· 1992-02-24 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was not violated by police interrogation after his arraignment because he did not explicitly assert his right to counsel, and any prosecutorial comment on his silence was harmless error.
• Sahara Coal Co. v. Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs
  946 F.2d 554· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Benefits Review Board erred in making its own factual determination of a material change in condition, and that the administrative law judge, not the Board, must make this determination.
• Gore v. Dugger
  933 F.2d 904· 11th Cir.· 1991-05-29 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of partial relief, agreeing that the exclusion of mitigating evidence was a violation of constitutional rights.
• United States v. Isidro Farias-Farias
  925 F.2d 805· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-22 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing the prosecution to cross-examine the defendant about his prior arrests and the nature of those arrests, as this evidence was admissible for impeachment and as substantive evidence of guilt, and any potential error was ha