harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard in Hawaii

12 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Hawaii 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.

Followed or applied (11)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Pesetigreen haw · 2003 · cited in 4 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2003–2016 2 sentences 2008Harmless Error "'In applying the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the court is required to examine the record and determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.'" State v. Peseti, 101 Hawai`i 172, 178, 65 P.3d 119, 125 (2003) (quoting State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai`i 109, 113-14, 924 P.2d 1215, 1219-20 (1996)) (brackets omitted). 2005Cf. State v. Peseti, 101 Hawai'i 172, 178 , 65 P.3d 119, 125 (2003): A violation of the constitutional right to confront adverse witnesses is subject to the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard.	4	4
State v. Cabreragreen haw · 1999 · cited in 3 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1999–2002 2 sentences 2002See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai`i 170, 182, 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) ("Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is `whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.'" (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai`i 359, 365, 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai`i 83, 93, 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State 603 v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai`i 465, 471, 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001). 2002*See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai'i 170, 182 , 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) (“Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is ‘whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.’” (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai'i 359, 365 , 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai'i 83, 93 , 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai'i 465, 471 , 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001).	2	3
State v. Balisbisanagreen haw · 1996 · cited in 2 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2003–2008 2 sentences 2008Harmless Error "'In applying the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the court is required to examine the record and determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.'" State v. Peseti, 101 Hawai`i 172, 178, 65 P.3d 119, 125 (2003) (quoting State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai`i 109, 113-14, 924 P.2d 1215, 1219-20 (1996)) (brackets omitted). 2003See Balisbisana, 83 Hawai'i at 113-14 , 924 P.2d at 1219-20 .	2	2
State v. Tetu.green haw · 2016 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 1 sentence 2020This standard requires a court to ‘examine the record and determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.’” State v. Tetu, 139 Hawaiʻi 207, 225, 386 P.3d 844, 862 (2016) (citation omitted).	1	1
State v. Ganogreen haw · 1999 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009 2 sentences 2009See State v. Gano, 92 Hawai'i 161, 176 , 988 P.2d 1153, 1168 (1999) (applying the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard to the erroneous admission of evidence). 2009See State v. Gano, 92 Hawai'i 161, 176 , 988 P.2d 1153, 1168 (1999) (applying the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard to the erroneous admission of evidence).	1	1
State v. Holbrongreen haw · 1995 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 2 sentences 2006See State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32 , 904 P.2d 912, 917 (1995) (applying the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard). 2006See State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32 , 904 P.2d 912, 917 (1995) (applying the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard).	1	1
State v. Pachecogreen haw · 2001 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 2 sentences 2002See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai`i 170, 182, 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) ("Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is `whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.'" (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai`i 359, 365, 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai`i 83, 93, 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State 603 v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai`i 465, 471, 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001). 2002*See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai'i 170, 182 , 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) (“Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is ‘whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.’” (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai'i 359, 365 , 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai'i 83, 93 , 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai'i 465, 471 , 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001).	1	1
State v. Crailgreen haw · 2001 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 2 sentences 2002See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai`i 170, 182, 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) ("Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is `whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.'" (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai`i 359, 365, 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai`i 83, 93, 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State 603 v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai`i 465, 471, 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001). 2002*See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai'i 170, 182 , 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) (“Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is ‘whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.’” (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai'i 359, 365 , 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai'i 83, 93 , 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai'i 465, 471 , 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001).	1	1
State v. Valdiviagreen haw · 2001 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 2 sentences 2002See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai`i 170, 182, 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) ("Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is `whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.'" (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai`i 359, 365, 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai`i 83, 93, 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State 603 v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai`i 465, 471, 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001). 2002*See State v. Crail, 97 Hawai'i 170, 182 , 35 P.3d 197, 209 (2001) (“Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is ‘whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction.’” (Quoting State v. Cabrera, 90 Hawai'i 359, 365 , 978 P.2d 797, 803 (1999)).); see also State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai'i 83, 93 , 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001); State v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai'i 465, 471 , 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001).	1	1
State v. Heardgreen haw · 1981 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001 2 sentences 2001Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is "whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction." Cabrera , 90 Hawai`i at 365, 978 P.2d at 803 (citing State v. Heard, 64 Haw. 193, 194 , 638 P.2d 307, 308 (1981)). 2001Under the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, the question is "whether there is a reasonable possibility that error may have contributed to conviction." Cabrera , 90 Hawai`i at 365, 978 P.2d at 803 (citing State v. Heard, 64 Haw. 193, 194 , 638 P.2d 307, 308 (1981)).	1	1
State v. Cullengreen haw · 1997 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999 2 sentences 1999“If there is ... a reasonable possibility ..., then the error is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the judgment of conviction on which it may have been based must be set aside.” State v. Maumalanga, 90 Hawai'i 58, 62 , 976 P.2d 372 , 376 151 (1998) (quoting State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai'i 1, 8 , 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997)). 1999“If there is ... a reasonable possibility ..., then the error is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the judgment of conviction on which it may have been based must be set aside.” State v. Maumalanga, 90 Hawai'i 58, 62 , 976 P.2d 372 , 376 151 (1998) (quoting State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai'i 1, 8 , 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997)).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Espiritu green haw · 2008 2 sentences 2009In State v. Espiritu, 117 Hawai'i 127 , 176 P.3d 885 (2008), the Hawai'i Supreme Court held that arguments by a prosecutor which misstate the law are reviewed on appeal according to the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard. 2009In State v. Espiritu, 117 Hawai'i 127 , 176 P.3d 885 (2008), the Hawai'i Supreme Court held that arguments by a prosecutor which misstate the law are reviewed on appeal according to the harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard.	1	2009–2009
Delaware v. Van Arsdall green scotus · 1986 2 sentences 2003Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt As this court stated in State v. Peseti, 101 Hawai'i 172, 183 , 65 P.3d 119, 130 (2003), “the denial of a defendant’s right to confront adverse witnesses is subject to the harmless- beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard of review.” See also Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986) (holding same). 2003Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt As this court stated in State v. Peseti, 101 Hawai'i 172, 183 , 65 P.3d 119, 130 (2003), “the denial of a defendant’s right to confront adverse witnesses is subject to the harmless- beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard of review.” See also Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986) (holding same).	1	2003–2003
State v. Maumalanga green haw · 1998 2 sentences 1999“If there is ... a reasonable possibility ..., then the error is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the judgment of conviction on which it may have been based must be set aside.” State v. Maumalanga, 90 Hawai'i 58, 62 , 976 P.2d 372 , 376 151 (1998) (quoting State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai'i 1, 8 , 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997)). 1999“If there is ... a reasonable possibility ..., then the error is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the judgment of conviction on which it may have been based must be set aside.” State v. Maumalanga, 90 Hawai'i 58, 62 , 976 P.2d 372 , 376 151 (1998) (quoting State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai'i 1, 8 , 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997)).	1	1999–1999

Statutes the citing opinions construe

HI § Haw. Rev. Stat. § 712-1243 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 142 (1983–2026) HI 12 (1999–2020) UT 11 (2014–2025) MI 8 (1996–2022) FL 4 (1991–2009) MN 4 (2006–2024) MD 3 (2022–2022) MO 3 (2010–2013) IL 3 (1979–2009) AL 2 (1997–2010) CO 2 (2002–2015) DC 2 (2013–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check