Harmless Error Standard

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

• Romanes v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  621 F. Supp. 2d 1249· M.D. Fla.· 2008-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's denial of his claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
• Wright v. State
  994 So. 2d 447· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-10-29 ·cited 4×
  The exclusion of two expert witnesses from testifying on the insanity defense is harmless error where two other defense experts provided substantial testimony on Wright's mental state at the time of the crimes.
• Crow v. State
  866 So. 2d 1257· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-02-19 ·cited 4×
  Thomas Crow, convicted of first-degree murder in 1985, appealed a trial court's order summarily denying his motion for postconviction DNA testing. The court held that Rule 3.853 is a valid exercise of judicial authority and that Crow's motion was sufficient to warrant a hearing,
• Williams v. State
  865 So. 2d 637· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-02-11 ·cited 4×
• Bell v. State
  645 So. 2d 37· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-10-24 ·cited 4×
  Monte Bell was convicted of robbery with a firearm under three separate counts. This appeal addresses whether the trial court's jury instruction regarding proof of firearm possession during armed robbery was legally sufficient. The court reversed Bell's conviction under Count II
• United States v. Hekimain
  975 F.2d 1098· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's failure to properly inform the defendant of the effects of supervised release and its power to depart upward from the sentencing guidelines constituted a violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, rendering the guilty plea involun
• Oliver v. United States
  921 F.2d 916· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the jury instructions on the burden of proof and presumption of correctness were erroneous, the error was harmless in this specific case because the government had introduced sufficient minimal evidence to support its tax assessment.
• United States v. Plesinski
  912 F.2d 1033· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a prosecutor's unauthorized participation in proceedings was harmless error and did not require dismissal of the indictment or disqualification, especially when the defect was later cured.
• United States v. Jones
  909 F.2d 533· D.C. Cir.· 1990-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions for the Travel Act were erroneous because they did not require proof of intent to violate specific state laws, and the evidence was insufficient to support the Mann Act conviction for 'transportation'.
• St. Luke Gregory, Jr. v. State OF N.C.
  900 F.2d 705· 4th Cir.· 1990-04-04 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would hold that any error in admitting a hearsay statement was harmless, and would reverse the grant of habeas corpus, finding the jury verdict reliable.
• Gunn v. Lanson Newsome
  851 F.2d 1294· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-08 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Brown
  832 F.2d 128· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that replaying a tape recording for the jury outside the presence of the defendants and their counsel violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43, and this error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, requiring reversal.
• Bright v. Williams
  817 F.2d 1562· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim regarding the jury instruction on intent was exhausted and that the erroneous instruction was not harmless error, thus affirming the grant of the writ of habeas corpus.
• DeVINE v. Solem
  815 F.2d 1205· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court applied the wrong standard in determining whether the admission of appellant's incriminating statements was harmless error.
• Burton v. Foltz
  810 F.2d 118· 6th Cir.· 1987-02-02 ·cited 4×
  A jury instruction that unconstitutionally shifts the burden of proof on intent can be harmless error if the evidence of intent is overwhelming and the predicate facts conclusively establish intent beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Spartanburg Cnty. Sch. Dist. Seven v. Nat'l Gypsum Co.
  805 F.2d 1148· 4th Cir.· 1986-11-25 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the jury instruction error was not significant enough to warrant reversal of the jury's verdict.
• Anstead v. COX Broad. & CNA Ins.
  500 So. 2d 197· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-09-16 ·cited 4×
  Although the deputy commissioner erred by finding Section 440.14(l)(c) inapplicable merely because Anstead had worked substantially the 13 weeks preceding his injury, the error was harmless because competent substantial evidence supported the finding that Anstead was not a season
• United States v. Suzan Joseph Daoud
  741 F.2d 478· 1st Cir.· 1984-08-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in refusing a curative instruction regarding the defendant's request for counsel, this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also held that questioning the defendant about her ability to pay for counsel was permiss
• Charles v. Foltz
  741 F.2d 834· 6th Cir.· 1984-08-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the use of prior uncounseled misdemeanor convictions for impeachment purposes did not violate due process, and any instructional error regarding malice was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Cheung Hon LAW
  633 F.2d 1156· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's failure to provide a perjury admonition and adequately inquire about promises outside the plea bargain constituted harmless error, and thus the guilty plea was valid.
• United States v. Almaguer
  632 F.2d 1265· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's failure to fully inform the defendant of the perjury risk under Rule 11(c)(5) was harmless error because the defendant suffered no prejudice and was not being prosecuted for perjury.
• Ulysses Gibson v. United States
  575 F.2d 556· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the improper use of prior uncounseled convictions to impeach a defendant's testimony constitutes harmless error if the evidence of guilt is overwhelming and the jury would have reached the same verdict regardless.
• Martin v. State OF Ind.
  521 F.2d 682· 7th Cir.· 1975-08-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition by deeming the constitutional issue moot, and that a remand is necessary for further factual determination.
• United States v. Adams
  470 F.2d 249· 10th Cir.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of William's statement, though potentially violating Bruton, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and William's statement was voluntarily made after a valid Miranda waiver.
• Tafoya v. Eyman
  455 F.2d 1265· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the accused has no right to counsel during out-of-court photographic identification and that any potentially tainted identifications were harmless error.
• Robideau v. Rhay
  452 F.2d 605· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comment on the petitioner's exercise of his Fifth Amendment right was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Evans v. Cupp
  415 F.2d 844· 9th Cir.· 1969-08-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding jury unanimity, prosecutorial comment on silence, and search and seizure were either waived, harmless, or not applicable under the relevant constitutional law at the time of trial.
• Montes-Valeton v. State
  141 So. 3d 204· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-03-12 ·cited 3×
  Luis Montes-Valeton appeals his DUI conviction for causing serious bodily injury, challenging the admission of blood test results and autopsy photographs. The Third District Court of Appeal affirms, finding no error in admitting the blood test results and concluding that any erro
• Jackson v. State
  37 So. 3d 370· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-05-28 ·cited 3×
  Jackson was convicted of cocaine trafficking and conspiracy in Hillsborough County, but the appellate court reversed the trafficking conviction because the evidence showed Jackson possessed the cocaine only in South Florida (Broward/Dade County), not in Hillsborough County where
• Harris v. State
  34 So. 3d 187· Fla. 1st DCA· 2010-05-06 ·cited 3×
  Dorothy Harris was convicted of conspiracy to possess hydrocodone based primarily on her brother's testimony. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the trial court committed reversible error by admitting testimony about Harris's outstanding warrant fo
• Williams v. State
  10 So. 3d 218· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-04-22 ·cited 3×
  Ronald Williams was convicted of attempted first and second degree murder. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed his convictions despite finding that the prosecutor made improper statements during closing argument, because the error was harmless in light of overwhelming e
• Dep't OF Prof'l Reg. v. Melvin S. Wise, M.D.
  575 So. 2d 713· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-02-14 ·cited 3×
  The Department of Professional Regulation appealed the Board of Medicine's dismissal of disciplinary charges against a psychiatrist accused of sexual misconduct with patients. The appellate court reversed because the hearing officer improperly admitted irrelevant evidence about t
• Johnson v. Luella Burke
  903 F.2d 1056· 6th Cir.· 1990-05-22 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions containing a Sandstrom error were harmless, and that Johnson's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct were without merit.
• Bouchard v. State
  556 So. 2d 1215· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-02-16 ·cited 3×
  Joseph Bouchard was convicted of DUI manslaughter arising from a fatal collision. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction, finding that the prosecutor improperly injected evidence of Bouchard's lack of remorse into the trial, which was neither relevant nor an
• United States v. Kington
  878 F.2d 815· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·cited 3×
  The court denied petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc, adhering to its prior decision and addressing specific arguments raised by the defendants.
• Glados, Inc. v. Reliance Ins. Co.
  888 F.2d 1309· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-03 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior fires involving a third party was not an abuse of discretion, and the exclusion of a police investigator's arson conclusion was harmless error.
• Sweeting v. State
  260 So. 3d 520· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-12-12 ·cited 2×
  Ebony Sweeting was convicted of battery of a law enforcement officer following an encounter at her residence when police came to arrest her nephew. The Florida appellate court reversed her conviction, finding that the prosecutor's closing argument improperly shifted the burden of
• Cohen v. Avra Jain
  219 So. 3d 100· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-04-19 ·cited 2×
  In consolidated appeals, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment in a contract dispute involving a promissory note. The court held that absent an express provision for compound interest in the note, only simple interest may be awarded, and affirmed th
• Brown v. State
  197 So. 3d 569· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-03-25 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court reversed Brown's cocaine trafficking conviction because the prosecution improperly cross-examined him and argued about his post-arrest silence, violating his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
• Miami Dade Cnty. Sch. Board/Gallagher Bassett v. Oneal Smith
  116 So. 3d 511· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-06-03 ·cited 2×
  In this workers' compensation case, the Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a permanent total disability (PTD) award because the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) abused its discretion by denying the Employer's motion to depose a treating physician whose opinions wer
• Cooper v. State
  68 So. 3d 263· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-12-01 ·cited 2×
  Cooper appeals his convictions for sexual abuse, challenging the trial court's admission of testimony about uncharged sexual incidents. On remand from the Florida Supreme Court to apply the correct harmless error standard, the Second District Court of Appeal affirms the convictio
• Smith v. State
  882 So. 2d 1050· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-08-24 ·cited 2×
  Antonio Smith appeals his conviction for battery on a law enforcement officer, resisting arrest, and cannabis possession, arguing the state failed to disclose a material witness (the vehicle lessee) in violation of discovery rules. The court held that the state's obligation to di
• Pride v. State
  809 So. 2d 40· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-02-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay evidence to explain the police investigation, as the circumstances leading to the investigation were not relevant and the evidence was likely misused.
• People OF Territory OF Guam v. Muna
  999 F.2d 397· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that errors in grand jury proceedings or the destruction of evidence do not warrant dismissal of an indictment after conviction if the defendant was not prejudiced and the police did not act in bad faith. Confessions were admissible as they were voluntary and knowi
• United States v. Mezzanatto
  998 F.2d 1452· 9th Cir.· 1993-07-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a criminal defendant can knowingly and voluntarily waive the protections of Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(e)(6).
• Stephens v. Miller
  989 F.2d 264· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of the defendant's testimony regarding a conversation during the alleged incident violated his Sixth Amendment right to testify and was not harmless error.
• Lowery v. Collins
  988 F.2d 1364· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-07 ·cited 2×
  The admission of a videotaped interview of a child complainant, without the child testifying in court and being subject to cross-examination, violates the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, and such an error is not harmless when the videotape likely contributed to the convic
• Keith v. State
  614 So. 2d 560· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-02-08 ·cited 2×
  David Keith appeals his aggravated battery conviction, challenging a jury instruction on self-defense that incorrectly stated the law regarding justifiable use of nondeadly force. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirms the conviction, finding the instructional error h
• United States v. Foster
  985 F.2d 466· 9th Cir.· 1993-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prosecutor's questioning of a defendant about her post-arrest silence, despite a timely objection and the court's instruction to answer, violated the Fifth Amendment and was not harmless error, requiring reversal of her conviction.
• Galindo v. Ylst
  971 F.2d 1427· 9th Cir.· 1992-08-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of the victim's statement did not deprive the defendant of constitutional rights, and the defendant waived his claim regarding impeachment with a prior conviction by not testifying.