Harmless Error Rule

664 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 839 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• 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
• United States v. Murphy
  763 F.2d 202· 6th Cir.· 1985-05-31
• Barry v. State
  467 So. 2d 434· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-04-11
  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
• Derock v. State
  461 So. 2d 1373· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-01-09
• Tallahassee Junior Acad. v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n
  461 So. 2d 968· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-12-11
  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
• 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.
• Boatwright v. State
  452 So. 2d 666· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-07-18
  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
  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
• Devine v. White
  711 F.2d 1082· D.C. Cir.· 1983-07-12 ·via Harmful Error Standard
  The court affirmed the arbitrator's decision setting aside the disciplinary sanction, despite the poor quality of the arbitrator's opinion.
• Washington v. Alberta Cooper
  416 So. 2d 1265· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-07-21 ·via Harmful Error Standard
• Hicks v. State
  411 So. 2d 1040· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-04-14
• Brown v. State
  407 So. 2d 1074· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-12-30
  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
• Cadena v. Estelle
  611 F.2d 1385· 5th Cir.· 1980-02-20 ·via Harmless Constitutional Error
  Any error in arraigning the appellant without counsel was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because no substantial prejudice occurred.
• Clark v. State
  378 So. 2d 1315· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-01-15
  A violation of the collateral crimes rule may be considered harmless error if the evidence of guilt is overwhelming and the defendant's substantial rights were not prejudiced.
• United States v. Kermit Frazier, Jr.
  580 F.2d 229· 6th Cir.· 1978-08-01 ·via Harmless Error Standard (Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A))
  The court held that the trial judge's questioning of defense counsel during opening statements, which forced counsel to choose between revealing privileged client information or appearing evasive, constituted prejudicial error.
• Bradley v. Cowan
  561 F.2d 1213· 6th Cir.· 1977-08-24
  The court held that the warrantless search of the hotel room violated the Fourth Amendment, but the admission of the seized evidence was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to other strong evidence of guilt.
• State v. Brown
  343 So. 2d 629· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-02-11
• United States ex rel. William Cadogan v. LaVALLEE
  502 F.2d 824· 2d Cir.· 1974-08-16 ·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, affirming the denial.
• United States ex rel. Russell Davis Mealey, Jr. v. The State of Del.
  489 F.2d 993· 3d Cir.· 1974-01-02
  The court held that the suggestive photographic identification, even if cumulative, could not be deemed harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to the potential for undue jury reliance on such dramatic testimony.
• Williams v. State
  291 So. 2d 240· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-12-19
• United States v. Plunk
  456 F.2d 1027· 6th Cir.· 1972-02-25
  The court held that the admission of agent testimony regarding initials on equipment was harmless error, even if improperly admitted.
• Rowe v. State
  250 So. 2d 920· Fla. 2d DCA· 1971-06-30
• Gray v. Ellsworth
  438 F.2d 130· 9th Cir.· 1971-02-03 ·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the constitutional error of admitting identification testimony from a one-man lineup without counsel was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Whitty v. State OF Wis. & Wilbur J. Schmidt
  436 F.2d 401· 7th Cir.· 1970-12-30 ·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated by the admission of evidence or the procedures used at his trial, and that any errors were harmless.
• United States v. Richards
  430 F.2d 1240· 7th Cir.· 1970-08-17
  The court held that the admission of testimony that a statement was taken from the defendant without showing Miranda compliance was error, but that this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Earnest Norman v. Nelson
  431 F.2d 1184· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-25 ·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the prisoner's confrontation clause claim was waived by failure to object at trial, and any error in admitting evidence was harmless.
• DON Kemper Co., Inc. v. Beneficial Standard Life Ins. Co.
  425 F.2d 221· 3d Cir.· 1970-04-20 ·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the trial judge did not commit reversible error in admitting or excluding evidence or in the jury charge, and thus affirmed the judgment.
• Sellars v. Logan Towing Co., Inc.
  414 F.2d 852· 8th Cir.· 1969-08-01
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions and admission of evidence were proper and did not constitute prejudicial error, affirming the jury's verdict.
• Downie v. Burke
  408 F.2d 343· 7th Cir.· 1969-03-06 ·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that even if the prosecutor's remarks were improper, they were not so inflammatory as to deny the petitioner a fair trial or violate his constitutional rights.
• United States v. McCall
  291 F.2d 859· 2d Cir.· 1961-06-26 ·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the admission of seized documents was harmless error because the defendant admitted writing the letter, and that the prosecution's closing statement did not constitute reversible error.
• Starr v. United States
  264 F.2d 377· D.C. Cir.· 1958-10-17
  The court held that a statement taken from an arrested person during an unnecessary delay in arraignment is inadmissible under Mallory v. United States, even if exculpatory, and its admission can be prejudicial error.
• City of Miami v. Roberts
  10 Fla. Supp. 26· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1956-12-12 ·via Harmful Error Analysis
  The Circuit Court reversed a municipal court conviction for passing a stop sign, holding that the trial court erred by admitting the defendant's statements to a police officer in violation of Florida Statute 317.17, which prohibits the use of police accident reports as evidence a
• Douglas v. State
  89 So. 2d 659· Fla.· 1956-09-26
  Charles Lamar Douglas was convicted of first-degree murder of Jack Johnson based entirely on circumstantial evidence. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction, holding that the trial court improperly admitted testimony of Douglas's father accusing him of the murder when
• Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Cromartie
  138 Fla. 483· Fla.· 1939-06-06 ·via Harmful Error Standard
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a judgment for an insured whose home and household effects were destroyed by fire, finding that while some errors occurred, they were not prejudicial enough to warrant a new trial.