Harmless Error Standard

411 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. DeShawn Lee Robinson
  978 F.2d 1554· 10th Cir.· 1992-11-02 ·cited 8×
  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.
• Bass v. Crispus C. NIX
  909 F.2d 297· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 8×
  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.
• Brookover v. Mary Hitchcock Mem'l Hosp.
  893 F.2d 411· 1st Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 8×
  The court concurs with the majority opinion without qualification.
• LAM v. State OF Iowa & Iowa State Dep't of Corr.
  860 F.2d 873· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-09 ·cited 8×
  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. Boyd
  620 F.2d 129· 6th Cir.· 1980-04-28 ·cited 8×
  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
• United States v. Longee
  603 F.2d 1342· 9th Cir.· 1979-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The admission of one defendant's out-of-court statement inculpating a co-defendant, when the declarant does not testify, violates the Confrontation Clause and constitutes plain error, requiring reversal of the co-defendant's conviction.
• United States v. Brown
  575 F.2d 746· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to make an explicit finding on the voluntariness of the defendant's statement, considering the issue of intoxication, with unmistakable clarity.
• United States v. Oliver
  492 F.2d 943· 8th Cir.· 1974-02-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the exclusion of testimony regarding the victim's reputation for truth and veracity improperly restricted the defendant's opportunity to present an adequate defense.
• United States v. Bamberger
  482 F.2d 166· 9th Cir.· 1973-05-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of a free transcript of a co-defendant's trial was harmless error, and the search warrant affidavit provided sufficient probable cause.
• Petley v. United States
  427 F.2d 1101· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instruction under 21 U.S.C. § 176a, while containing an unconstitutional inference, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also found sufficient evidence for knowing possession and proper admission of evidence.
• United States v. Fueston
  426 F.2d 785· 9th Cir.· 1970-04-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction, an unconstitutional presumption instruction required a new trial.
• United States v. Davis
  418 F.2d 59· 9th Cir.· 1969-10-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's statement was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming independent evidence of guilt, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Zurita
  369 F.2d 474· 7th Cir.· 1966-11-09 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge holds that a sketch made by an agent from witness impressions should be considered a 'written statement' under 18 U.S.C. § 3500(e)(1) for impeachment purposes.
• Rodriguez v. State
  248 So. 3d 1085· Fla.· 2018-07-12 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarifies the harmless error standard on appeal, holding that the state must demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that an evidentiary error did not affect the jury verdict, rather than merely whether the error resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The C
• United States v. Edwards
  211 F.3d 1355· 11th Cir.· 2000-05-19 ·cited 7×
  Daryl Edwards was convicted of drug conspiracy and distribution and sentenced to life imprisonment. Edwards appealed on two grounds: that his trial violated the Speedy Trial Act by commencing only twenty-nine days after his initial appearance, and that he was denied effective cro
• Thomas v. State
  645 So. 2d 185· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-11-23 ·cited 7×
  Thomas was convicted of burglary and criminal mischief after his wallet was found at the scene of a home break-in. On appeal, he challenged the trial court's comments about fingerprint evidence during voir dire as prejudicial, but the appellate court affirmed his conviction, find
• Solles v. Israel
  868 F.2d 242· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-08 ·cited 7×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct, while egregious, did not rise to the level of constitutional error requiring habeas relief, and that defense counsel's performance was effective.
• Christa Adkins v. Sotolongo
  227 So. 3d 717· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-09-20 ·cited 6×
  A mother declared indigent in a child custody dispute seeks certiorari review to challenge a trial court order requiring her to advance the court-appointed guardian's deposition fees before being permitted to depose the guardian regarding the reasonableness of the guardian's fees
• Hoag v. State
  12 So. 3d 907· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-07-08 ·cited 6×
  James Hoag challenged his 1994 sentencing guidelines scoresheet, alleging it contained errors that resulted in an illegal sentence. The court found that his additional offense of attempted second-degree murder was incorrectly scored as level 9 instead of level 8, resulting in a s
• Suda v. State
  838 So. 2d 665· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-03-04 ·cited 6×
  Florida appellate court reversed a trafficking conviction because the trial court abused its discretion in finding harmless a discovery violation involving an undisclosed State witness, applying the extraordinarily high standard that requires showing no reasonable possibility the
• Allen v. State
  789 So. 2d 1154· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-07-05 ·cited 6×
  Allen was convicted of armed kidnapping, robbery, and carjacking. The appellate court affirmed, holding that a physical description of crime perpetrators given by a witness constitutes a non-hearsay statement of identification under Florida Evidence Code § 90.801(2)(c), and any e
• Logan Wallace v. State
  768 So. 2d 1247· Fla. 1st DCA· 2000-10-17 ·cited 6×
  Logan Wallace appeals his second-degree murder conviction, arguing the prosecutor's repeated and deliberate references to the victim of the defendant's alleged vulgar comments as a "white woman" constituted improper appeals to racial prejudice that denied him a fair trial. The co
• United States v. Olson
  978 F.2d 1472· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-05 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to disclose the informant's address, nor in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Saenz
  969 F.2d 294· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court's error in misstating the minimum term of supervised release was harmless and did not entitle the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea.
• Ouimette v. Moran
  942 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the state prosecutor's failure to disclose the extensive criminal record and deals made with a key witness violated the petitioner's due process rights under Brady v. Maryland.
• Collazo v. Estelle
  898 F.2d 87· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's confession was voluntary and admissible, as it was not the product of police coercion despite initial improper statements.
• United States v. Parker
  877 F.2d 327· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for two counts of conspiracy was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings on venue, evidence exclusion, grand jury testimony, prosecutorial arguments, or sentencing.
• Lombard v. Lynaugh
  868 F.2d 1475· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a defendant constructively denied effective assistance of appellate counsel falls under the Penson v. Ohio standard, where prejudice is presumed, obviating the need for a Strickland analysis.
• Cooper v. Scroggy
  845 F.2d 1385· 6th Cir.· 1988-04-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Calloway's confession was unconstitutionally admitted, but Cooper's confession was not. However, Cooper's Sixth Amendment rights were violated by the admission of Calloway's confession against him.
• United States v. Lane
  834 F.2d 645· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or other constitutional violations, and therefore, the denial of his habeas corpus petition was affirmed.
• Clark v. Rose
  822 F.2d 596· 6th Cir.· 1987-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The Court held that the Sandstrom error in the jury instruction was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence overwhelmingly established the defendant's guilt and intent, and the jury would have reached the same verdict regardless of the erroneous instruction.
• United States v. Schmitt
  794 F.2d 555· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-18 ·cited 6×
  Even if the prosecutor's comments on the appellant's silence violated the Fifth Amendment, such comments were harmless error because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming. The admission of evidence regarding the appellant's tax liability was also proper.
• United States v. Mechanik
  756 F.2d 994· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a defendant subject to retrial after a mistrial due to a hung jury has no colorable double jeopardy claim appealable before final judgment, following Richardson v. United States.
• United States ex rel. Theodore Ross v. Franzen
  688 F.2d 1181· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to submit a straight 'not guilty' verdict form to the jury violated the defendant's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Abell Holiday
  482 F.2d 729· D.C. Cir.· 1973-07-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that even if a lineup was uncounseled, in-court identifications can be admissible if they have an independent source, and references to the lineup at trial can be harmless error if the evidence of guilt is overwhelming.
• United States v. Miramon
  470 F.2d 1362· 9th Cir.· 1972-12-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that even if there was an error in admitting evidence obtained from a search, the error was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the identification procedures and assistance of counsel were not improper.
• Prentice v. State
  319 So. 3d 57· Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-02-17 ·cited 5×
  The trial court's life sentences for molestation counts were properly imposed but improperly included a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum that is not authorized by statute; the sentencing error was harmless and correctable by ministerial removal of the erroneous provision from t
• Mdvip, Inc. v. Beber
  222 So. 3d 555· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-05-31 ·cited 5×
  MDVIP, a concierge medicine provider, was sued for fraud and vicarious liability arising from alleged medical malpractice by an affiliated physician, Dr. Metzger, that resulted in a patient's leg amputation. The appellate court reversed the fraud verdict and the directed verdicts
• Strachan v. State
  199 So. 3d 1022· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-06-29 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing the jury to read transcripts of recorded calls or in denying motions to suppress recorded jail calls and a gun.
• Atis v. State
  32 So. 3d 81· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-08-21 ·cited 5×
  Jean Atis appealed his convictions for attempted carjacking and attempted robbery, arguing the State improperly cross-examined him about his prior criminal record. The court found the questioning was poorly handled but concluded any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Figueroa v. State
  952 So. 2d 1238· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-04-04 ·cited 5×
  Jose Figueroa was convicted of attempted carjacking and appealed, claiming the trial court abused its discretion by limiting individual voir dire of jurors and by admitting a portion of his pre-trial statement. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no abuse of disc
• Conner v. State
  910 So. 2d 313· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-09-02 ·cited 5×
  Christine Conner was convicted of robbery, cocaine possession, and trespass after being caught leaving a Walmart with unpaid merchandise and drugs. She appealed arguing the prosecutor impermissibly shifted the burden of proof by commenting during closing argument on her failure t
• Smith v. State
  679 So. 2d 30· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-08-14 ·cited 5×
  Leonard Smith was convicted by jury of throwing a deadly missile into an occupied building after throwing a rock at a window at a youth development center. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court erred by excluding testimony that would have impeached key state
• Avra Jain v. Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC
  322 So. 3d 1201· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-06-16 ·cited 4×
  An attorney's alleged failure to object to a creditor's failure to produce an original promissory note does not constitute the proximate cause of a guarantor's loss when the guaranty is absolute and unambiguous, enforceable independent of the note. The issue was barred by collate
• Baca v. State
  313 So. 3d 1177· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-01-11 ·cited 4×
  The court denied a petitioner's request for a belated direct appeal and imposed sanctions because he made false statements under oath regarding when he learned no appeal was filed. The court clarified that a belated direct appeal can be filed while a postconviction appeal is pend
• Desmond Eugene Owens v. State
  261 So. 3d 585· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-12-19 ·cited 4×
  A defendant was convicted of fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer while driving recklessly. The defendant appeals, challenging the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal, the prosecutor's misstatement of law in closing argument, and objections to troop
• Williams v. State
  257 So. 3d 1192· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The trial court did not commit reversible error in admitting eyewitness identifications, photographic evidence, jail visitation logs showing bias, or in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal where competent evidence supported every element of the charged offenses.
• Acevedo v. State
  218 So. 3d 878· Fla.· 2017-05-18 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a prior conviction under the 1981 version of section 800.04 (lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor) constitutes a "similar offense" qualifying a defendant as a Dangerous Sexual Felony Offender (DSFO) under the DSFO Act, resolving a conflict
• Newton v. State
  160 So. 3d 524· Fla. 5th DCA· 2015-03-27 ·cited 4×
  James Newton appeals his DUI manslaughter conviction, challenging the trial court's exclusion of his exculpatory statement to a paramedic that he had not been driving. The appellate court agreed the trial court erred but affirmed the conviction, finding the error harmless beyond
• Perez v. State
  20 So. 3d 440· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-10-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the appellant's post-conviction claim regarding erroneous victim injury points without considering its merits.