harmless error doctrine

• Fear of a Paper Tiger: Enforcing Louisiana s Procedural and Statutory Rules in the Wake of Harmless Error Analysis

Introduction The Harmless Error Doctrine What's Wrong With The Judge Being The Juror? The End Justifies The Means Analysis Prosecutorial Discretion To Follow The Rules And The Abuse Of That Discretion Integrity, Politics, And The Judiciary Conclusion

• Louisiana Law Review
• Nbr. 64-1, October 2003

• State v. Brown, (Ohio 1992)

Criminal law - Search and seizure - Application of harmless error doctrine - In making a Crim.R. 52(A) harmless error analysis, any error will be deemed harmless if it did not affect the accused's "substantial rights.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Bradford, (Ohio 2005)

SENTENCING -- aggravated robbery; robbery; consecutive sentences; law of the case doctrine; R.C. 2929.14; harmless error.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499 (1983)

...609 . The court declined to rely on the harmless-error doctrine, stating that application of the do...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• State v. Frazier, (Ohio 2007)

Child sexual abuse involving multiple rapes and gross sexual impositions over a period of years. Sufficiency of the evidence. Weight of the evidence. Modification of judgment pursuant to Crim.R. 33(D), R.C. 2945.79(D) and App.R. 12(B). Penetration, however, slight, is a necessary element of the crime of rape by digital vaginal penetration, R.C. 2907.02(A)(1)(b). Where the evidence is that the accused touched the vaginal area of the victim, but there is no evidence or testimony that the accused digitally penetrated the victim, a conviction for rape by digital vaginal penetration must be reversed and the conviction modified to one of gross sexual imposition. Weight of the evidence. Upon appellate review, the testimony of child victims of sexual multiple rapes and other sexual assaults was...

.... Appellant raises three assignments of error: . - 3 -. No. 05AP-1323 4. [I.] APPELLANT'S CONVI... noted that the "ordinary prudential doctrines," such as waiver, may be applied to Blakely claims... structural error is not subject to the harmless error analysis, non-structural errors may be found...

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Johns v. Astrue, (10th Cir. 2011)

...precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and. collateral ... specified procedure, but argued that the error was harmless because the dispositive question (whe...

• Federal Circuits

• United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438 (1986)

... Misjoinder under Rule 8(b) is subject to harmless-error analysis and is not reversible error per se.... only to the statutory harmless-error doctrine. . [Footnote 3] But cf. Bruton v. United States,...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• The Louisiana 'Explanatory Exception': Faithfulness to Louisiana?s Hearsay Framework or Mere Storytime with the Prosecution?

Introduction - II. Anatomy of an Anecdote: What Is the Explanatory - Exception? - A. The Rule: Hearsay - B. The "Exception": Explanation - C. What It Was and What It Is - D. Scope of the Exception - . Relevancy - . Verbal Statements v. Conduct - . Constitutional Restrictions - . Other Evidentiary Limitations - III. Louisiana’s Application of the Explanatory Exception: - A Tumultuous Tale - A. The Supreme Court Trilogy - B. Too Much Hearsay Relevancy - C. Uncaging of the Beast: Inconsistent Appellate - Application - . Blatant Explanatory Exception Abuse - . Specific Categories of Misuse - IV. Resolving the Plot’s Central Conflict: How to Legally - Apply the Explanatory Exception in Louisiana - A. Return to a Proper Relevancy Analysis - . Explanations of an Officer’s Conduct - . Explan...

• Louisiana Law Review
• Nbr. 71-4, July 2011

• Shinseki v. Sanders, 556 U. S. (2009)

...�take due account of the rule of prejudicial error.” §7261(b)(2). It has developed a system for de... determining whether a notice error is harmless. When the VA provides a claimant with a notice tha... that spawned the harmless-error doctrine,” namely, reversing for error “ ‘regardless ...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• Connecticut v. Johnson, 460 U.S. 73 (1983)

... whether, if a jury is so instructed, the error can ever be harmless. Thereafter, the Connecticut ... limits Chapman's harmless-error doctrine. It establishes a rule of automatic reversal becau...

• U.S. Supreme Court