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

• Dolinsky v. State
  576 So. 2d 271· Fla.· 1991-01-18 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  Raymond Dolinsky was convicted of two counts of second-degree murder and one count of first-degree murder in a drug transaction robbery that resulted in three deaths. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions but vacated his death sentence, finding the trial court improp
• United States v. Williams
  919 F.2d 1451· 10th Cir.· 1990-11-26 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  A guilty plea is voluntary if the defendant understands the court is not bound by sentencing recommendations, even if attorneys provide an estimated range. Sentencing guideline calculations are reviewed for error, but harmless errors do not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Colombo
  909 F.2d 711· 2d Cir.· 1990-07-23 ·cited 8×
• Bass v. Crispus C. NIX
  909 F.2d 297· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the prosecutor's impeachment of the defendant's trial testimony by referencing his post-arrest silence violated the Due Process Clause, and this violation was not harmless error.
• United States v. Miller
  904 F.2d 65· D.C. Cir.· 1990-06-01 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis (Kotteakos V. United States)
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the appellants permission to introduce the witness's grand jury testimony, entitling them to a new trial.
• Vance Anthony Young v. State
  562 So. 2d 370· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-05-22 ·cited 8×
  Vance Young was convicted of four counts of sexual battery and appealed, arguing the trial court improperly excluded testimony about the victim's prior sexual activities. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that the victim's consensual encounters with other men did not
• Polson v. Davis
  895 F.2d 705· 10th Cir.· 1990-02-06 ·cited 8×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that Kansas law does not recognize defamation per se, that remedies under the Kansas Acts Against Discrimination preclude a common law retaliatory discharge claim, that negligent supervision is not a recognized tort in Kansas, and that Title VII claims cannot be br
• Shaw v. State
  557 So. 2d 77· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-01-18 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
• Krischer v. Sch. Bd. OF Dade Cnty.
  555 So. 2d 436· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-01-16 ·cited 8×
  A Florida teacher challenged the non-renewal of her employment contract, arguing the school board violated statutory notice requirements under section 231.36(3)(e). The court affirmed the termination, holding that a technical violation of the notice provision does not require rev
• Brookover v. Mary Hitchcock Mem'l Hosp.
  893 F.2d 411· 1st Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court concurs with the majority opinion without qualification.
• Campaneria v. Reid
  891 F.2d 1014· 2d Cir.· 1989-12-12 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's denial of habeas corpus, finding the admission of an unconstitutionally obtained tape recording was not harmless error.
• United States v. Lorenza Benefield, Sr.
  889 F.2d 1061· 11th Cir.· 1989-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's sentence did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or in limiting character witnesses.
• City OF Malden v. Union Elec. Co. & Mo. Utils. Co.
  887 F.2d 157· 8th Cir.· 1989-10-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury's findings that alternative transmission methods existed and that the utility did not unreasonably refuse to wheel power were supported by the evidence, thus affirming the judgment against the plaintiff's antitrust claims.
• Sheppard v. Rees
  909 F.2d 1234· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  A violation of the Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation is not subject to the harmless-error rule when it arises from the constitutionally improper use of one of multiple legal theories culminating in a general verdict.
• LAM v. State OF Iowa & Iowa State Dep't of Corr.
  860 F.2d 873· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-09 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The admission of a videotaped deposition of a burglary victim, whose unavailability was not properly established, violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, but this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Darby
  857 F.2d 623· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions were misleading because they did not adequately inform the jury that attempted bank robbery requires proof of specific intent to take the money, not just a knowing or voluntary act.
• United States v. Tobias
  836 F.2d 449· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that cryptographic cards are tangible property subject to 18 U.S.C. § 641, and that any errors in the grand jury process were rendered harmless by the petit jury's conviction.
• United States v. Elpiko Morales
  834 F.2d 35· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-17 ·cited 8×
  Statements made by a prisoner during custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings are inadmissible, but the error may be harmless.
• Meadows v. Manfred G. Holland
  831 F.2d 493· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-16 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The majority decision improperly overruled prior panel precedent (Adkins) by disregarding established principles of federal collateral review and habeas corpus jurisprudence.
• Leatrice Little v. Armontrout
  819 F.2d 1425· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that admitting the victim's posthypnotic identification testimony violated the petitioner's due process rights because the hypnosis procedure lacked essential safeguards and corroboration, rendering the identification unreliable.
• Armontrout v. State
  503 So. 2d 984· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-03-12 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  Roger Armontrout appeals his conviction for grand theft in the second degree and his sentence. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentence and remanded for resentencing due to errors in the sentencing scoresheet that were not properly adjudicated by the
• George Jones M-2329 v. Zimmerman
  805 F.2d 1125· 3d Cir.· 1986-11-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that denying suppression of an inculpatory statement implicitly ruled it voluntary, and that the failure to submit the voluntariness issue to the jury was not a constitutional error requiring reversal. The court also found no violation of the right to counsel.
• Bradley v. State
  497 So. 2d 281· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-10-09 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  A trial judge does not violate Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410 by responding to a jury's request to review evidence outside the presence of counsel where the jury neither requested additional instructions nor requested that testimony be read to them, as rule 3.410's noti
• Parker v. State
  495 So. 2d 1204· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-09-30 ·cited 8×
  A trial court's jury instruction on excusable homicide that omits the disjunctive word 'or' between the three statutory elements constitutes reversible error when the instruction may mislead the jury into believing all three elements must be proven rather than only one.
• Evrard v. State
  502 So. 2d 3· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-07-09 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Analysis In Sentencing
  Karen Evrard appealed her sentencing departure from Florida's guidelines. The trial court imposed a 30-month prison sentence based on three factors: an uncounseled prior conviction, a stale prior conviction, and the defendant's alleged dishonesty to Department of Corrections offi
• United States v. White
  788 F.2d 390· 6th Cir.· 1986-04-17 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the defendant's petition for rehearing should be denied because no substantial error affecting the outcome of the trial was committed.
• TER Keurst v. Miami Elevator Co. & Centaur Ins. Co.
  486 So. 2d 547· Fla.· 1986-02-27 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that trial courts cannot require parties to exercise peremptory challenges simultaneously in writing without knowing the challenges of the opposing party. The court disapproved of the jury selection method used despite affirming the ultimate result,
• Diede v. Burlington N. R.R. Co.
  772 F.2d 593· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-27 ·cited 8×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a Boiler Safety Inspection Act regulation as evidence of negligence under FELA, nor in excluding testimony and a stipulation regarding the non-taxability of annuity payments.
• United States v. Branson
  756 F.2d 752· 9th Cir.· 1985-03-29 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the prosecutor's references to the defendant's silence after being read his Miranda rights constituted plain error, violating his Fifth Amendment rights.
• In re TSE
  748 F.2d 722· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the contempt order was valid because procedural irregularities were harmless and the government's denial of illegal electronic surveillance was adequate.
• Tyler v. Milt Harper
  744 F.2d 653· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the district court correctly applied collateral estoppel to bar the relitigation of claims that were fully and fairly litigated in state court, and that any procedural errors were harmless.
• United States v. Lorenzo Lawrence Jose DE LA LUZ Gallegos
  738 F.2d 378· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that spontaneous, unprovoked statements made by a defendant after invoking the right to counsel, and not in response to interrogation, are admissible. The court also held that a prosecutor's opening statement mentioning the defendant's request for counsel was not g
• Carrillo v. Perkins
  723 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-30 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  A restriction on cross-examination of a prosecution witness regarding potential bias, even if it violates the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause, can be harmless error if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming.
• Compagnie DES Bauxites de Guinee v. Ins. Co. of N. Am. Appeal of Compagnie Des Bauxites de Guinee
  721 F.2d 109· 3d Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 8×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by evidence and that no trial errors warranted a new trial, affirming the judgment.
• Cyril Edwards v. E.W. Jones
  720 F.2d 751· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-01 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that any constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, despite the concurring judge's disagreement with the application of the forfeiture rule.
• Layton v. State
  435 So. 2d 883· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-07-12 ·cited 8×
  A prosecutor's comment during closing argument that is susceptible to interpretation as referring to a defendant's failure to testify constitutes reversible error if preserved by objection.
• United States v. Lane
  708 F.2d 1394· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-20 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that while Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 25(a) was violated by the substitution of judges, the error did not affect substantial rights and thus did not warrant reversal. Other alleged errors regarding impeachment, jury instructions, and prosecutorial misconduc
• Guerra v. State
  427 So. 2d 1098· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-03-15 ·cited 8×
  Guerra and Alfonso challenged the notice procedures used by Florida's Unemployment Appeals Commission in administrative hearings, arguing that the agency's notice form violated statutory requirements to include detailed statements of the matters asserted by parties. The court hel
• Bishop v. Rose
  701 F.2d 1150· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-08 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule (Chapman V. California)
  The court held that the state's acquisition and use of a defendant's confidential statement prepared for his attorney violated the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, and this violation was not harmless error.
• Helton v. State
  424 So. 2d 137· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-12-28 ·cited 8×
  Johnny Diamond Helton appealed his conviction for two counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance, challenging the chain of custody for evidence and prosecutorial comments during closing argument. The Florida District Court of Appeal, First District affirmed the convi
• United States v. Baldwin
  691 F.2d 718· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the search warrant was valid because the agent's observations, made from an area where the defendant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy, provided probable cause, and the admission of the post-arrest statement was harmless error.
• In the Interest of K. H.
  418 So. 2d 1080· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-08-04 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  A juvenile's confession was obtained after a police officer promised he would not be charged if he confessed. Although the officer later withdrew the promise when the juvenile was caught lying, the court held the subsequent confession inadmissible because the juvenile reasonably
• Harrison v. Owen
  682 F.2d 138· 7th Cir.· 1982-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The admission of Harrison's oral incriminating statements to police was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt because his subsequent confession to a friend was nearly identical and admitted into evidence.
• Sarai Ramos v. State
  413 So. 2d 1302· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-05-25 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  Sarai Ramos was convicted of two counts of second degree murder and firearm offenses. The Florida appellate court reversed her convictions because the prosecutor improperly commented during voir dire on the defendant's right to remain silent in a manner that invited the jury to d
• United States ex rel. Ronald Doss v. Lou V. Brewer
  685 F.2d 1003· 7th Cir.· 1982-03-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the admission of certain evidence was an error, it was harmless due to overwhelming untainted evidence.
• McCLAIN v. State
  411 So. 2d 316· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-03-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a witness's wife's hospitalization does not make the witness unavailable to testify under the statute, but the erroneous admission of the witness's prior testimony was harmless.
• Horn v. The United States
  671 F.2d 1328· Ct. Cl.· 1982-02-24 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Rule
  The court held that the plaintiff was denied fair consideration for promotion due to material errors in his records and the illegal composition of selection boards, rendering his non-selection and subsequent release from active duty void.
• Johnson v. Wyrick
  653 F.2d 1234· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-20 ·cited 8×·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of relief.
• Studstill v. State
  397 So. 2d 753· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-04-30 ·cited 8×
  Appellant Studstill was convicted of burglary and grand theft but argues the trial judge failed to instruct the jury on applicable penalties as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.390(a). The court reversed, holding that the mandatory penalty instruction requirement
• United States v. Boyd
  620 F.2d 129· 6th Cir.· 1980-04-28 ·cited 8×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that while the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's silence was improper, it constituted harmless error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt. The court also affirmed the trial court's decisions regarding identification instructions, hearsay, discovery, and cont