Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1987–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida 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 |
|---|---|---|
Neder v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2026Weekly D2236 (Fla. 1st DCA Oct. 15, 2025); McGlaun v. State, 420 So. 3d 634 , 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 2025); see also Neder v. U.S., 527 U.S. 1, 19 (1999) (“[W]here a defendant did not, and apparently could not, forms a constituent part of a new offense and must be submitted to the jury”). 2 bring forth facts contesting the omitted element, answering the question whether the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error does not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the jury trial guarantee.”). 2025See Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 19 (1999) ("[W]here a defendant did not, and apparently could not, bring forth facts contesting the omitted element, answering the question whether the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error does not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the jury trial guarantee."). | 6 | 6 |
State v. Harbaughgreen2 sentences2025Our supreme court held that the error was harmless because “[a]nswering the question whether the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error does not fundamentally undermine the purposes of 19 the jury trial guarantee.” Johnson, 994 So. 2d at 963 -66 (quoting State v. Harbaugh, 754 So. 2d 691, 694 (Fla. 2000)). 2008See Harbaugh, 754 So.2d at 694 ("[A] Gaudin error is subject to harmless error review.... `[A]nswering the question whether the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error does not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the jury trial guarantee.'") (quoting Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 19 , 119 S.Ct. 1827 , 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999)); see also Neder, 527 U.S. at 19 , 119 S.Ct. 1827 (discussing that in a case where the jury-trial guarantee has been violated, but the "defendant did not, and apparently could not, bring forth facts contesting the omitted element, " such a violation | 2 | 2 |
State v. DiGuiliogreen2 sentences2008In State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986), this Court outlined the harmless-error test that is applicable here: The harmless error test, as set forth in Chapman and progeny, places the burden on the state, as the beneficiary of the error, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict or, alternatively stated, that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction. 1990Once the State has established this, the Appellate Court must evaluate the record to determine, not whether there was overwhelming evidence of guilty, but whether the result would have been the same absent the error: “[H] armless error analysis must not become a device whereby the appellate court substitutes itself for the jury, examines the permissible evidence, excludes the impermissible and determines that the evidence of guilt is sufficient or even overwhelming based on the permissible evidence.” Ciccarelli v State, 531 So.2d 129, 131 (Fla. 1988) (quoting State v DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, | 1 | 3 |
Ciccarelli v. Stategreen2 sentences1990Once the State has established this, the Appellate Court must evaluate the record to determine, not whether there was overwhelming evidence of guilty, but whether the result would have been the same absent the error: “[H] armless error analysis must not become a device whereby the appellate court substitutes itself for the jury, examines the permissible evidence, excludes the impermissible and determines that the evidence of guilt is sufficient or even overwhelming based on the permissible evidence.” Ciccarelli v State, 531 So.2d 129, 131 (Fla. 1988) (quoting State v DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, 1989The state having presented a prima facie case of harmlessness, the question to be answered by this court is whether the result at trial “would have been the same absent the error....” Ciccarelli v. State, 531 So.2d 129 (Fla.1988) (reviewing court must determine not whether overwhelming evidence of guilt exists but whether it can be said beyond a reasonable doubt that error could not have affected verdict). | 1 | 3 |
Rose v. Clarkgreen2 sentences2000If the answer to that question is "no," holding the error harmless does not "reflec[t] a denigration of the constitutional rights involved." [ Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 577 , 106 S.Ct. 3101 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986)]. 2000If the answer to that question is "no," holding the error harmless does not "reflec[t] a denigration of the constitutional rights involved." [ Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 577 , 106 S.Ct. 3101 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986)]. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Delvagreen1 sentence2011State v. Delva, 575 So.2d 643, 644-45 (Fla.1991). | 1 | 1 |
Burkhardt v. Bassgreen1 sentence2000See Burkhardt v. Bass, 711 So.2d 158 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (only § 61.30(2)(b), Fla. Stat., requirement for imputation of income is a finding that the parent is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed, but purpose of appellate court's requirement of factual findings is "to facilitate meaningful appellate review" of trial court's decisions involving fact-finding and exercise of judicial discretion). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Johnson v. State
green
1 sentence2025Our supreme court held that the error was harmless because “[a]nswering the question whether the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error does not fundamentally undermine the purposes of 19 the jury trial guarantee.” Johnson, 994 So. 2d at 963 -66 (quoting State v. Harbaugh, 754 So. 2d 691, 694 (Fla. 2000)). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Ross
green
1 sentence1990The Court went on to state: “Overwhelming evidence of guilt does not negate the fact that an error that constituted a substantial part of the prosecution’s case may have played a substantial party in the jury’s deliberations and thus contributed to the actual verdict reached, for the jury may have reached its verdict because of the error without considering other reasons untainted by the error that would have supported the same result.” Id. (quoting People v Ross, Cal.2d 64, 60 Cal. Rptr, 254, 429 P.2d 606 (1968). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Delaware v. Van Arsdall
green
2 sentences1987See Rose v. Clark, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3105 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986); Delaware v. Van Arsdall, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1436 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986); Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). 1987See Rose v. Clark, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3105 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986); Delaware v. Van Arsdall, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1436 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986); Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Chapman v. California
red
2 sentences1987See Rose v. Clark, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3105 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986); Delaware v. Van Arsdall, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1436 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986); Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). 1987See Rose v. Clark, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3105 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460 (1986); Delaware v. Van Arsdall, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1436 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986); Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.