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

• Moore v. Dir., Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs, U.S. Dep't OF Labor
  835 F.2d 1219· 7th Cir.· 1987-12-29
  The court held that the Benefits Review Board erred in affirming the Administrative Law Judge's denial of benefits, as the ALJ's finding that the claimant returned to work was not supported by substantial evidence and was not harmless error.
• Martin v. State
  517 So. 2d 737· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-23 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  The trial court erred in admitting evidence of prior convictions after the state failed to furnish them to the defense pretrial, and in denying the motion for mistrial when a burglary conviction was disclosed. The defendant's credibility-dependent defense and the state's discover
• Abreu v. State
  511 So. 2d 1111· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-09-04 ·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  Pablo Abreu was convicted by jury of trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the prosecution's closing argument improperly commented on Abreu's failure to testify, which violated his Fift
• Lowry v. State
  510 So. 2d 1196· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-08-12 ·via Chapman Harmless Error Test
  The court remanded the case for a determination of whether the prosecutor's comment on the appellant's right to remain silent was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, following the standard set in State v. DiGuilio.
• Doyle Thomas Williams v. State
  510 So. 2d 656· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-07-31 ·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  Doyle Thomas Williams appealed his conviction for engaging a child in sexual activity. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court erroneously admitted hearsay testimony that violated the rules of evidence and prejudiced the
• Christopher v. State
  824 F.2d 836· 11th Cir.· 1987-07-23 ·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the admission of Christopher's confession was not harmless error because it was obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, as police failed to scrupulously honor his repeated requests to cease questioning.
• Med. Pers. Pool OF Palm Beach, Inc. v. Walsh
  508 So. 2d 453· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-05-27 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  A trial court does not abuse its discretion by admitting testimony contradicting prior interrogatory answers when the court considers such answers as prior inconsistent statements rather than striking the testimony, particularly where the party challenging the testimony does not
• United States v. Hammond
  815 F.2d 302· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-13
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding that any governmental misconduct was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and did not prejudice the defendant's trial.
• Isais Garcia Torres v. State
  504 So. 2d 534· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-04-01 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  Garcia Torres was convicted of marijuana possession after police found marijuana and $12,500 cash in a vehicle where he was a passenger. He appeals challenging admission of similar fact evidence of a prior marijuana possession arrest and the state's comments on the cash, but the
• Blackfoot Livestock Comm'n v. Dep't of Agric.
  810 F.2d 916· 9th Cir.· 1987-02-20
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency's findings of violations of the Packers and Stockyards Act, including check-kiting, and that the agency had the authority to increase the sanction imposed.
• United States v. Williams
  809 F.2d 63-75· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-31
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying mistrial motions related to the jury viewing defendants in custody or in refusing certain jury instructions, and that any errors regarding the indictment's submission were harmless.
• Nelson v. Pulaski Cnty. Special Sch. Dist.
  803 F.2d 961· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-24
  The court held that the district court's findings of legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for the employment decision were not clearly erroneous, and evidentiary errors were harmless.
• Morgan v. State
  492 So. 2d 1072· Fla.· 1986-08-21 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410 does not require the defendant's presence when a judge responds to a jury's request for additional instructions, only that the prosecutor and defense counsel be notified. Although the trial court erred b
• Ulvano v. State
  492 So. 2d 470· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-08-12 ·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
• United States v. Cook
  794 F.2d 561· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the disclosure of grand jury transcripts to deputized state officers was permissible under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii), probable cause existed for the search warrant despite potentially tainted information, prosecutor's comments on one defendant's silence did not viol
• Smith v. Off. OF Pers. Mgmt.
  784 F.2d 397· Fed. Cir.· 1986-02-20 ·via Harmless Error In Administrative Proceedings
  The court held that contentions of evidentiary insufficiency do not fall within the narrow exceptions to the bar on judicial review of factual underpinnings in employee disability retirement cases.
• Blanks v. State
  482 So. 2d 557· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-02-05 ·via Burden Of Proof For Harmless Error
  Defendant Blanks was convicted of burglary and robbery based primarily on the victim's identification. The Florida appellate court reversed because the trial court sustained numerous groundless objections to defense counsel's closing argument and rebuked counsel in front of the j
• Ney v. McCAIN
  480 So. 2d 189· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-12-18
  The court held that while prosecutorial comment on a defendant's failure to testify is improper, it was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt in this case.
• United States v. Caldwell
  776 F.2d 981-989· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-21
  The court held that the district court did not err in handling juror misconduct allegations ex parte, nor in refusing further investigation, and that any technical errors were harmless.
• Vernie Eugene Thrift v. State
  477 So. 2d 1077· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-10-30 ·via Harmless Error Standard
  Vernie Eugene Thrift appeals his arson conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motions for mistrial based on improper prosecutorial comments during voir dire and closing argument. The appellate court affirms, finding that the circumstantial evidence was suff
• Rahme v. State
  474 So. 2d 1236· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-08-29
  Affirmed grand theft conviction despite suggestive photographic lineup and improper judicial questioning, finding both errors harmless in light of positive in-court identifications and overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Lane v. Lodal, Inc.
  474 So. 2d 413· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-08-22
  The court held that section 46.051, Florida Statutes (1983), which prohibits joining a products liability insurer as a party defendant, is unconstitutional as a violation of Article II, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and reversed the trial court's decision to strike the i
• United States v. Murphy
  763 F.2d 202· 6th Cir.· 1985-05-31 ·via Harmless Error Rule
• Rhames v. State
  473 So. 2d 724· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-05-24
  Conspiracy to commit grand theft is a necessarily lesser-included offense of the dealing in stolen property charge under Section 812.019(2), and conviction of both violates double jeopardy; the trial court also erred in failing to instruct the jury under Section 812.025 that it c
• Barry v. State
  467 So. 2d 434· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-04-11 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  Barry appeals from conviction for manslaughter and probation revocation, challenging the prosecutor's alleged comment on his failure to testify at trial and the denial of his mistrial motion. The court affirms the conviction, applying a harmless error analysis and certifying a qu
• J.P. Morgan, Jr. v. State
  464 So. 2d 1306· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-03-13
• J.W. Trope v. State
  467 So. 2d 331· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-03-06
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed J.W. Trope's conviction for second degree murder because a law enforcement officer improperly testified about the defendant's silence at the time of arrest, violating the defendant's Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, which const
• Otto v. Gayla Carpets & Zurich-American Ins. Agency
  462 So. 2d 608· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-01-29
  Fred Otto appealed a workers' compensation order denying his claim for medical expenses and psychiatric care following an industrial foot injury. The court affirmed the denial, finding that Otto failed to establish a causal connection between his industrial accident and his subse
• Derock v. State
  461 So. 2d 1373· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-01-09 ·via Harmless Error Rule
• Sockwell v. Blackburn
  748 F.2d 979· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-17
  The court held that the admission of the inculpatory statement was not a violation of the petitioner's right to counsel, and any potential error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Tallahassee Junior Acad. v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n
  461 So. 2d 968· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-12-11 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  Tallahassee Junior Academy appealed the Unemployment Appeals Commission's decision granting unemployment benefits to former employee Sara Purvis. The court reversed and remanded for a new hearing after finding that procedural defects—including a defective recording of the origina
• State v. Moya
  460 So. 2d 446· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-11-27
  The State appeals from a trial court order granting defendant Moya a new trial after a jury convicted him of kidnapping and sexual battery. The appellate court affirms because the prosecutor made an impermissible comment on the defendant's failure to testify, constituting fundame
• United States v. Hood
  748 F.2d 439· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-05 ·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress, ruling on impeachment, or refusing the accomplice jury instruction, and affirmed the conviction.
• Lane v. State
  457 So. 2d 586· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-10-16
  Florida appellate court affirmed defendant's robbery and attempted first-degree murder convictions, holding that any error in admitting victim identification evidence was harmless and that the trial court properly restricted cross-examination regarding the victim's drug activity
• Boatwright v. State
  452 So. 2d 666· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-07-18 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  Prosecutorial misconduct in making repeated "send a message" arguments to the jury and improper cross-examination attacks on a witness's credibility constitute error, but such error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt only when the evidence of guilt is overwhelming. The grand t
• Quick v. State
  450 So. 2d 880· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-05-09 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  Shirley Quick, an inmate convicted of grand theft from a prison canteen, appeals her conviction. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reverses and remands for a new trial due to the inadmissible introduction of crucial evidence lacking proper foundation and its prejudicial effect
• Hamilton v. State
  447 So. 2d 1008· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-03-29
  The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that a prior conviction for petty theft qualifies as a crime involving dishonesty under Florida's witness impeachment statute, allowing it to be used to impeach a defendant's credibility without requiring additional proof of deceitfulness o
• Crick v. Smith
  729 F.2d 1038· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-06 ·via Chapman V. California Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the juvenile court judge would have waived jurisdiction even if apprised of the omission of 'best interest' findings, rendering the due process violation harmless error.
• Ivany v. Am. Motorists Ins. Co.
  448 So. 2d 523· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-02-29
• United States v. Bentley
  726 F.2d 1124· 6th Cir.· 1984-01-31
  The court would hold that the defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel and that any error in admitting his statements was harmless.
• Chester v. State
  444 So. 2d 1051· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-01-20
• Patterson v. Slachter
  439 So. 2d 338· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-10-18
  A trial court may amend a foreclosure judgment to correct an erroneous legal description of property without ordering a new trial if the defendant cannot demonstrate prejudice.
• Torrence v. State
  430 So. 2d 489· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-04-05
  Harold Torrence appeals his conviction for dealing in stolen property, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and its denial of his motion for mistrial. The appellate court affirms the conviction on the knowledge element but reverses and rema
• Dudley J. Paquette v. Atlanska-Plovidba and M/V Rudjer Boskovic
  701 F.2d 746· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-10
  The court held that while the district court erred in denying the vessel owner an opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff's expert economist regarding probable federal income taxes on lost earnings, this error was not prejudicial in the context of the case.
• Hicks v. State
  411 So. 2d 1040· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-04-14 ·via Harmless Error Rule
• Johnson v. State
  408 So. 2d 813· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-01-19
  The trial court's exclusion of expert testimony regarding defendant's insanity at the time of the offense deprived defendant of his constitutional right to present witnesses and constitutes reversible error that cannot be deemed harmless.
• Brown v. State
  407 So. 2d 1074· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-12-30 ·via Harmless Error Rule
  Isaac Brown appealed his robbery conviction on the ground that the trial court erroneously refused to give a jury instruction on the maximum and minimum penalties for the crime charged, as required by Tascano v. State and Florida Criminal Procedure Rule 3.390. The appellate court
• Baker v. State
  403 So. 2d 1121· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-09-23
• McCOVICK v. State
  400 So. 2d 473· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-04-15
  The appellate court must reverse a conviction when the trial court fails to give a mandatory jury instruction, even if guilt is clear and the error is harmless.
• Powell v. State
  403 So. 2d 429· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-03-27
  A conviction must be reversed and remanded for a new trial if the denial of a defense request for an instruction on penalties was properly preserved on appeal.