149 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2014–2026 101 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Palmer v. Hendricksgreen1 sentence2024See Carr, 300 Kan. at 211 (noting the majority rule "appears" to be the harmless-error standard for a wrongful denial of the right to testify) (citing Palmer v. Hendricks, 592 F.3d 386 [3d Cir. 2010]; Ortega v. O'Leary, 843 F.2d 258 [7th Cir. 1988]; Wright v. Estelle, 572 F.2d 1071 [5th Cir. 1978]; Quarels v. Com., 142 S.W.3d 73 [Ky. 2004]). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Carrgreen1 sentence2024See Carr, 300 Kan. at 211 (noting the majority rule "appears" to be the harmless-error standard for a wrongful denial of the right to testify) (citing Palmer v. Hendricks, 592 F.3d 386 [3d Cir. 2010]; Ortega v. O'Leary, 843 F.2d 258 [7th Cir. 1988]; Wright v. Estelle, 572 F.2d 1071 [5th Cir. 1978]; Quarels v. Com., 142 S.W.3d 73 [Ky. 2004]). | 1 | 1 |
Crane v. Kentuckygreen2 sentences2014See Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683, 691 , 106 S. Ct. 2142 , 90 L. 2014See Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683, 691 , 106 S. Ct. 2142 , 90 L. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chapman v. California
red
2 sentences2026In evaluating prejudice, we simply adopt the traditional constitutional harmlessness inquiry demanded by Chapman [v. California, 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S. Ct. 824 , 17 L. 2026In evaluating prejudice, we simply adopt the traditional constitutional harmlessness inquiry demanded by Chapman [v. California, 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S. Ct. 824 , 17 L. | 134 | 2016–2026 |
State v. Ward
green
2 sentences2024We review prejudice using the traditional constitutional harmlessness inquiry—whether "the State can demonstrate 'beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of will not or did not affect the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record, i.e., where there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict.'" 305 Kan. at 109 (quoting State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , Syl. ¶ 6, 256 P.3d 801 [2011]). 2024We review prejudice using the traditional constitutional harmlessness inquiry—whether "the State can demonstrate 'beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of will not or did not affect the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record, i.e., where there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict.'" 305 Kan. at 109 (quoting State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , Syl. ¶ 6, 256 P.3d 801 [2011]). | 11 | 2014–2024 |
State v. Blevins
green
2 sentences2024State v. Blevins, 313 Kan. 413 , 428, 485 P.3d 1175 (2021); State v. Ballou, 310 Kan. 591 , 596, 448 P.3d 479 (2019). 2024State v. Blevins, 313 Kan. 413 , 428, 485 P.3d 1175 (2021); State v. Ballou, 310 Kan. 591 , 596, 448 P.3d 479 (2019). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Ballou
green
2 sentences2024State v. Blevins, 313 Kan. 413 , 428, 485 P.3d 1175 (2021); State v. Ballou, 310 Kan. 591 , 596, 448 P.3d 479 (2019). 2024State v. Blevins, 313 Kan. 413 , 428, 485 P.3d 1175 (2021); State v. Ballou, 310 Kan. 591 , 596, 448 P.3d 479 (2019). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Bingham v. United States
green
2 sentences2017In other words, prosecutorial error is harmless if the State can demonstrate 'beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of will not or did not affect the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record, i.e., where there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict.' State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , Syl. ¶ 6, 256 P.3d 801 (2011), cert. denied __ U.S. __, 132 S. Ct. 1594 (2012). 2016Ed. 2d 321 (1958); Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. at 242 .) Our own court has long summarized, articulated, and followed the constitutional harmlessness test from Chapman as follows: "[T]he error may be declared harmless where the party benefitting from the error proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of will not or did not affect the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record, i.e., where there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , Syl. ¶ 6, 256 P.3d 801 (2011), cert. denied 132 S. Ct. 1594 (2012). | 2 | 2016–2017 |
State v. WARRIOR
green
1 sentence2025Warrior, 294 Kan. at 510 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Santos-Vega
green
1 sentence2024See State v. Sherman, 305 Kan. 88 , 109, 378 P.3d 1060 (2016); Santos-Vega, 299 Kan. at 18 . 5 Unanimity Analysis First, we must decide whether multiple acts were presented by the State. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Quarels v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2024See Carr, 300 Kan. at 211 (noting the majority rule "appears" to be the harmless-error standard for a wrongful denial of the right to testify) (citing Palmer v. Hendricks, 592 F.3d 386 [3d Cir. 2010]; Ortega v. O'Leary, 843 F.2d 258 [7th Cir. 1988]; Wright v. Estelle, 572 F.2d 1071 [5th Cir. 1978]; Quarels v. Com., 142 S.W.3d 73 [Ky. 2004]). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Daniel Ortega v. Michael O'leary, Warden
green
1 sentence2024See Carr, 300 Kan. at 211 (noting the majority rule "appears" to be the harmless-error standard for a wrongful denial of the right to testify) (citing Palmer v. Hendricks, 592 F.3d 386 [3d Cir. 2010]; Ortega v. O'Leary, 843 F.2d 258 [7th Cir. 1988]; Wright v. Estelle, 572 F.2d 1071 [5th Cir. 1978]; Quarels v. Com., 142 S.W.3d 73 [Ky. 2004]). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Archie D. Wright v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections
green
1 sentence2024See Carr, 300 Kan. at 211 (noting the majority rule "appears" to be the harmless-error standard for a wrongful denial of the right to testify) (citing Palmer v. Hendricks, 592 F.3d 386 [3d Cir. 2010]; Ortega v. O'Leary, 843 F.2d 258 [7th Cir. 1988]; Wright v. Estelle, 572 F.2d 1071 [5th Cir. 1978]; Quarels v. Com., 142 S.W.3d 73 [Ky. 2004]). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Stewart v.Ross
green
1 sentence2021State v. Ross, 310 Kan. 216 , 220‐21, 445 P.3d 726 (2019). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Marks
green
1 sentence2020Just as in those cases, Schmeal had no constitutional right to personal copies of discovery, "particularly when that discovery was already provided to his or her attorney." Marks, 297 Kan. at 149 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Salary
green
2 sentences2020Under that standard, an error is harmless if this court is "persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no impact on the trial's outcome, i.e., there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Salary, 301 Kan. 586, 607 , 343 P.3d 1165 (2015). 14 The testimonial status of passcodes and passwords is a rich and rapidly developing area of law this court has not yet addressed. 2020Under that standard, an error is harmless if this court is "persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no impact on the trial's outcome, i.e., there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Salary, 301 Kan. 586, 607 , 343 P.3d 1165 (2015). 14 The testimonial status of passcodes and passwords is a rich and rapidly developing area of law this court has not yet addressed. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Berger v. New York
green
1 sentence2019The constitutional harmlessness test from Chapman v. California , 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 , reh. denied 386 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 1283 , 18 L.Ed.2d 241 (1967), applies. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Seymour v. United States
green
2 sentences2019Ed. 2d 705 , reh. denied 386 U.S. 987 (1967), applies. 2019The constitutional harmlessness test from Chapman v. California , 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 , reh. denied 386 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 1283 , 18 L.Ed.2d 241 (1967), applies. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Haygood
green
1 sentence2019Prosecutorial error is harmless if the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the error will not or did not affect the trial's outcome in light of the entire record, i.e., when there is no reasonable possibility the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Haygood, 308 Kan. 1387 , Syl. ¶ 3, 430 P.3d 11 (2018). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Chandler
green
2 sentences2018Prosecutorial error during a trial is harmless if the State shows beyond a reasonable doubt the error did not affect the trial's outcome in light of the entire record, i.e., there is no reasonable possibility the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Chandler , 307 Kan. 657 , Syl. ¶¶ 6, 414 P.3d 713 (2018). 2018Prosecutorial error during a trial is harmless if the State shows beyond a reasonable doubt the error did not affect the trial's outcome in light of the entire record, i.e., there is no reasonable possibility the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Chandler , 307 Kan. 657 , Syl. ¶¶ 6, 414 P.3d 713 (2018). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Ward v. Kansas
green
1 sentence2018In other words, prosecutorial error is harmless if the State can demonstrate 'beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of will not or did not affect the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record, i.e. , where there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict.' State v. Ward , 292 Kan. 541 , Syl. ¶ 6, 256 P.3d 801 , (2011), cert. denied 565 U.S. 1221 (2012). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.
green
1 sentence2016Ed. 2d 321 (1958); Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. at 242 .) Our own court has long summarized, articulated, and followed the constitutional harmlessness test from Chapman as follows: "[T]he error may be declared harmless where the party benefitting from the error proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of will not or did not affect the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record, i.e., where there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict." State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , Syl. ¶ 6, 256 P.3d 801 (2011), cert. denied 132 S. Ct. 1594 (2012). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Crawford
green
1 sentence2016And because the constitutional harmlessness test of Chapman is both mandated by the dictates of due process and more stringent than our statutory standard, we have routinely put our focus on the Chapman standard because "'the State necessarily meets the lower statutory standard under K.S.A. 60-261 if it meets the higher constitutional standard.'" State v. Crawford, 300 Kan. 740, 746 , 334 P.3d 311 (2014). 24 After 12 years of application, we can now identify the "punitive" aspect of Tosh— extended from the concerns about gross and flagrant conduct and prosecutorial ill will recited in Thompson | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Dull
green
2 sentences2014This court begins with the constitutional harmlessness analysis when both the constitutional and nonconstitutional errors arise from the same acts and omissions. 298 Kan. at 837 . 2014If the constitutional error requires reversal of a defendant’s conviction, it is unnecessary to conduct the nonconstitutional harmlessness analysis. 298 Kan. at 837 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.