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

• Malatkofski v. United States
  179 F.2d 905· 1st Cir.· 1950-01-25 ·cited 54×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the indictments were sufficient, the denial of severance motions was proper, and the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings on evidence or jury instructions.
• Cardona v. State
  185 So. 3d 514· Fla.· 2016-02-18 ·cited 53×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Ana Maria Cardona was convicted of first-degree murder and aggravated child abuse of her three-year-old son and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial based on the prosecutor's pervasive and improper closing arguments, particularly rep
• United States v. DeCICCO
  899 F.2d 1531· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-20 ·cited 53×
  The court held that a defendant's guilty plea will not be withdrawn if the defendant was adequately informed of the court's independence from the plea agreement, and that Sentencing Guideline § 3B1.1(c) requires organizing at least one criminally responsible individual.
• McQUEENEY v. Wilmington Tr. Co.
  779 F.2d 916· 3d Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 53×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that evidence of subornation of perjury is relevant under Rule 401 and, absent substantial unfair prejudice, admissible under Rule 403, and that the standard for harmless error review in civil cases is the same as in criminal cases ('highly probable' the error did
• Peoples Bank OF Indian River Cnty. (proposed new bank) v. State
  395 So. 2d 521· Fla.· 1981-02-26 ·cited 53×
  Peoples Bank challenged the Department of Banking and Finance's denial of its banking license application, attacking the constitutionality of statutory provisions and claiming the agency improperly considered extraneous data without affording an opportunity for rebuttal. The Flor
• Flanigan v. Burlington N. Inc.
  632 F.2d 880· 8th Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 53×
  The court held that while the failure to instruct the jury that a FELA award is not subject to income tax was an error under *Liepelt*, it was harmless error in this case because the verdict was supported by the evidence and did not show signs of being inflated by a misunderstand
• Rice v. United States
  356 F.2d 709· 8th Cir.· 1966-02-28 ·cited 53×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that a proceeding before the National Labor Relations Board is pending from the moment a charge is filed, and that ex parte communication between the judge and jury during deliberations, without evidence of lack of prejudice, warrants reversal.
• Bisaccia v. The Attorney Gen. of the State of N.J.
  623 F.2d 307· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 52×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that using a co-conspirator's guilty plea as evidence of a defendant's guilt violates the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• United States v. Crawford
  438 F.2d 441· 8th Cir.· 1971-02-17 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the trial court erred in permitting the prosecution to cross-examine the defendant about his association with individuals convicted of drug offenses, as this was unduly prejudicial and exceeded the scope of direct examination. The court also found that admitti
• Brown v. State
  755 So. 2d 616· Fla.· 2000-03-09 ·cited 51×·via Harmless Error Review
  Paul Brown, a death row inmate, appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial, rejecting his ineffective assistance of counsel claims and finding procedural ba
• United States v. Chilcote
  724 F.2d 1498· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 51×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court affirmed all of appellant's convictions, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence or the sufficiency of the indictment.
• Eberhardt v. Bordenkircher
  605 F.2d 275· 6th Cir.· 1979-09-10 ·cited 51×·via Harmless Error Standard
  A prosecutor's comment on a defendant's failure to testify, even if brief, is not harmless error if the evidence is not overwhelming and the trial contained other substantial errors.
• McINTYRE v. Nance Ruth McINTYRE
  452 So. 2d 14· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-04-18 ·cited 50×
  A Florida appellate court affirmed a trial court's modification of a child custody arrangement, allowing the custodial mother to relocate with both children to Japan for a two-year military assignment while interpreting the state's newly amended custody statutes. The court held t
• Chipman v. Mercer
  628 F.2d 528· 9th Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 50×
  The denial of cross-examination to explore a witness's potential bias against a group to which the defendant belonged violated the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause.
• United States v. Guerra
  334 F.2d 138· 2d Cir.· 1964-06-05 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the use of a single, non-incriminating question and answer obtained in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, when introduced in an abortive attempt to impeach on a minor issue, did not require reversal of the conviction.
• Tugwell v. A. F. Klaveness & Co.
  320 F.2d 866· 5th Cir.· 1963-07-03 ·cited 50×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the exclusion of a prior injury report and the judge's comments regarding the plaintiff's withholding of evidence did not constitute harmful error, as the jury had already determined the accident did not occur.
• United States v. Endicott
  803 F.2d 506· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-27 ·cited 49×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that inflammatory references to political assassination and murder by a prosecutor in closing arguments, when evidence is not overwhelming and corrective action is mild, constitute prosecutorial misconduct that can deny a fair trial.
• United States v. Brown
  571 F.2d 980· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-07 ·cited 49×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the district court did not commit reversible error by dismissing two jurors, as proper procedures were followed and no abuse of discretion occurred. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• United States v. Dixon
  562 F.2d 1138· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-13 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the hearsay statement was improperly admitted under the coconspirator exception as to Dixon.
• United States v. Thornbrugh
  962 F.2d 1438· 10th Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·cited 48×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that while the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and no individual error warranted reversal, the sentence was improperly enhanced under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1).
• Marino v. Vasquez
  812 F.2d 499· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 48×
  The court held that jury misconduct involving an unauthorized dictionary definition of malice and an out-of-court experiment created a reasonable possibility of prejudice, warranting habeas relief for murder and attempted murder convictions, but not for felony false imprisonment.
• Simmons, Inc. v. Pinkerton's, Inc.
  762 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-28 ·cited 48×
  The dissenting judge argues that the erroneous jury instruction and admission of irrelevant evidence were not harmless errors and warrant a new trial.
• United States v. Siegel
  587 F.2d 721· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-11 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the appellant received a fair trial, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2314.
• Schaffer v. Universal Rundle Corp.
  397 F.2d 893· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 48×
  The court held that a sole stockholder cannot sue in his own name for damages to the corporation, and that the jury's verdict likely included damages for the individual, requiring a new trial for the corporation. The court affirmed the dismissal of antitrust claims.
• Seabrooks v. United States
  32 F.4th 1375· 11th Cir.· 2022-05-06 ·cited 47×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the Supreme Court's decision in Rehaif v. United States applies retroactively to initial § 2255 motions, and the district court's error in giving an aiding and abetting instruction without proof of knowledge of the co-defendant's felon status was no
• Katos v. Robert B. Cushing, D.D.S. & Robert B. Cushing, D.D.S., P.A.
  601 So. 2d 612· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-06-23 ·cited 47×·via Harmful Error Standard
  The court affirmed a dental malpractice judgment, finding no harmful error in evidentiary rulings because excluded evidence was cumulative and admitted testimony was not prejudicial, and the jury verdict was supported by competent evidence.
• Matire v. Louie Wainwright
  811 F.2d 1430· 11th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 47×
  The court held that appellate counsel's failure to raise the Fifth Amendment issue regarding improper comments on the defendant's post-arrest silence constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Johnson v. Trueblood
  629 F.2d 287· 3d Cir.· 1980-07-31 ·cited 47×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend their pleadings to include claims arising from the foreclosure of the shopping center, and that the jury instruction regarding the business judgment rule was also erroneous under Delaware law.
• Bustamante v. Eyman
  456 F.2d 269· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-07 ·cited 47×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the replay of electronically recorded instructions in the defendant's absence was not an error of constitutional dimension and, even if it were, it was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Arvanitis
  902 F.2d 489· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-03 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that a mere inaccurate prediction of sentencing by counsel does not constitute ineffective assistance, but remanded restitution orders where legal fees were improperly included or where causation of loss was not established.
• United States ex rel. Raymond Burke v. Greer
  756 F.2d 1295· 7th Cir.· 1985-03-13 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the prosecutor's repeated indirect references to the defendants' failure to testify were constitutionally impermissible and not harmless error, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Udey
  748 F.2d 1231· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-07 ·cited 46×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(A) (Harmless Error)
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to convict Edwin Udey of harboring or conspiring to harbor a fugitive, as the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Udey knew of the federal warrant or affirmatively cooperated in the conspiracy.
• Sullivan v. State OF Ala.
  666 F.2d 478· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 46×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the admission of pre-Miranda statements was constitutional as they were voluntary, and post-Miranda statements were admissible due to a valid waiver, and prosecutorial comment on silence was harmless error.
• United States v. McCLAIN
  531 F.2d 431· 9th Cir.· 1976-02-13 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's car was permissible under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, and that while the admission of hearsay evidence to show predisposition was error, it was harmless.
• Haynes v. The United States
  418 F.2d 1380· Ct. Cl.· 1969-12-12 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for most procedural claims and that other alleged procedural errors were harmless. The court also found the administrative decision regarding the charges of inefficiency and failure to meet deadlines was
• United States v. Broadhead
  413 F.2d 1351· 7th Cir.· 1969-07-15 ·cited 46×
  The court held that even though the lineup was conducted in violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel, the in-court identification was admissible because it had an independent basis. The court also found that the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's failure
• Holt v. United States
  342 F.2d 163· 5th Cir.· 1965-03-12 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of prior mistaken identifications in similar cases, as it was relevant to the defendant's mistaken identity defense.
• Nelson v. United States (two cases)
  208 F.2d 505· D.C. Cir.· 1953-07-02 ·cited 46×
  The court held that evidence obtained from a defendant under duress and coercion during a Senate Committee investigation is inadmissible under the Fourth Amendment, and this error requires reversal of convictions for all jointly tried defendants.
• Graham v. State
  207 So. 3d 135· Fla.· 2016-09-01 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts on whether a defendant can be convicted multiple times under the same sexual offense statute for distinct acts committed in a single criminal episode. The Court held that under the 'distinct acts' test from Blo
• Puleio v. Vose
  830 F.2d 1197· 1st Cir.· 1987-10-09 ·cited 45×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the appellant's claims were procedurally barred or lacked constitutional merit, affirming the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
• Solina v. United States
  709 F.2d 160· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 45×·via Harmless Error Standard
  Representation by an unlicensed attorney, even if unknowingly, is a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel that cannot be treated as harmless error.
• Emery J. Hill v. Spiegel, Inc.
  708 F.2d 233· 6th Cir.· 1983-05-31 ·cited 45×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 61 (Harmless Error)
  The court held that damages for pain and suffering are not recoverable under the ADEA and that certain employee statements admitted as hearsay were inadmissible. The court also found that liquidated damages are mandatory upon a finding of willfulness.
• United States v. Petit
  841 F.2d 1546· 11th Cir.· 1988-04-11 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a conspiracy conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 371 is valid even if the substantive offense (possessing stolen goods) was factually impossible because the goods were not actually stolen, as long as the defendants believed they were stolen. The court also held that
• Clark v. Dugger
  834 F.2d 1561· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 44×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's request for a psychiatric expert because the defendant failed to make a preliminary showing that his sanity was a significant factor at trial. The court also found no constitutional violations regarding ju
• Polk v. The Sch. Bd. OF Polk Cnty.
  373 So. 2d 960· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-08-10 ·cited 44×
  This case addresses whether the Polk County School Board properly adopted a new high school attendance plan for Lakeland that would reassign some students to different schools. The court affirmed the school board's decision, finding it was a valid exercise of quasi-legislative di
• Wilson v. Hon. Robert J. Henderson
  584 F.2d 1185· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-20 ·cited 44×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that the detective's continued interrogation after the suspect invoked his right to remain silent violated Miranda and Massiah principles.
• United States v. Jasper Wycoff, Jr.
  545 F.2d 679· 9th Cir.· 1976-11-15 ·cited 44×·via Harmless Error Standard
  The court held that while eliciting testimony about an arrestee's post-arrest silence and request for counsel was error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence and prompt jury admonitions. The court also found that a change in jury instructions wit
• Johnson v. State
  314 So. 2d 248· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-06-12 ·cited 44×
  Willie Johnson Jr. was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment for killing a victim in a knife altercation. The appellate court reversed the conviction based on two trial errors: the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on third-degree murder, a
• Vaccaro v. United States
  461 F.2d 626· 5th Cir.· 1972-04-12 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the Leary decision, which struck down a statutory presumption regarding knowledge of illegal marijuana importation, must be applied retroactively. The court also established a harmless error rule for cases where the unconstitutional presumption was used.
• United States v. Butler
  426 F.2d 1275· 1st Cir.· 1970-06-03 ·cited 44×·via Harmless Constitutional Error
  The court held that the in-court identifications were admissible as they had an independent basis, and remanded the speedy trial issue due to uncertainty regarding counsel's representation and the defendant's awareness of his rights.