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.
12 Wyoming opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2025 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wyoming 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 |
|---|---|---|
Stewart Roy Yazzie v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2025See Person v. State, 2023 WY 26, ¶ 71 , 526 P.3d 61, 78 (Wyo. 2023) (“Structural error is an error so grave and fundamental that it requires automatic reversal, without regard to prejudice.” (citing Yazzie v. State, 2021 WY 72, ¶ 13 , 487 P.3d 555, 560 (Wyo. 2021))). [¶16] Unfortunately, even after Westmark, we continued to rely on Parkhurst’s distinction between an improper “comment” on the right to remain silent and a “reference” thereto. 2025See Person v. State, 2023 WY 26, ¶ 71 , 526 P.3d 61, 78 (Wyo. 2023) (“Structural error is an error so grave and fundamental that it requires automatic reversal, without regard to prejudice.” (citing Yazzie v. State, 2021 WY 72, ¶ 13 , 487 P.3d 555, 560 (Wyo. 2021))). [¶16] Unfortunately, even after Westmark, we continued to rely on Parkhurst’s distinction between an improper “comment” on the right to remain silent and a “reference” thereto. | 3 | 4 |
Neder v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2014Structural error is a defect "affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply errors in the trial process itself." Granzer v. State, 2008 WY 118, ¶ 16 , 193 P.3d 266, 271 (Wyo.2008) (citing Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 8 , 119 S.Ct. 1827, 1833 , 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999)). 2014Structural error is a defect "affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply errors in the trial process itself." Granzer v. State, 2008 WY 118, ¶ 16 , 193 P.3d 266, 271 (Wyo.2008) (citing Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 8 , 119 S.Ct. 1827, 1833 , 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999)). | 2 | 7 |
Arizona v. Fulminantegreen2 sentences2024Thus, the defining feature of a structural error is that it ‘affect[s] the framework within which the trial proceeds,’ rather than being ‘simply an error in the trial process itself.’ Yazzie, 2021 WY 72, ¶ 14 , 487 P.3d at 560 (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 , 111 S. Ct. 1246, 1265 (1991)). 2024Thus, the defining feature of a structural error is that it ‘affect[s] the framework within which the trial proceeds,’ rather than being ‘simply an error in the trial process itself.’ Yazzie, 2021 WY 72, ¶ 14 , 487 P.3d at 560 (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 , 111 S. Ct. 1246, 1265 (1991)). | 2 | 3 |
Kelly James Person v. The State of Wyominggreen2 sentences2025See Person v. State, 2023 WY 26, ¶ 71 , 526 P.3d 61, 78 (Wyo. 2023) (“Structural error is an error so grave and fundamental that it requires automatic reversal, without regard to prejudice.” (citing Yazzie v. State, 2021 WY 72, ¶ 13 , 487 P.3d 555, 560 (Wyo. 2021))). [¶16] Unfortunately, even after Westmark, we continued to rely on Parkhurst’s distinction between an improper “comment” on the right to remain silent and a “reference” thereto. 2025See Person v. State, 2023 WY 26, ¶ 71 , 526 P.3d 61, 78 (Wyo. 2023) (“Structural error is an error so grave and fundamental that it requires automatic reversal, without regard to prejudice.” (citing Yazzie v. State, 2021 WY 72, ¶ 13 , 487 P.3d 555, 560 (Wyo. 2021))). [¶16] Unfortunately, even after Westmark, we continued to rely on Parkhurst’s distinction between an improper “comment” on the right to remain silent and a “reference” thereto. | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Pearson, Ericgreen2 sentences2023“Errors of this type are so intrinsically harmful as to require automatic reversal without regard to their effect on the outcome.” Id. (quoting United States v. Pearson, 203 F.3d 1243, 1260 (10th Cir. 2000)). 2014"Errors of this type are so intrinsically harmful as to require automatic reversal ... without regard to their effect on the outcome."" United States v. Pearson, 203 F.3d 1243, 1260 (10th Cir.2000) (quoting Neder, 527 U.S. at 8 , 119 S.Ct. at 1833 ). [T21] The bar for finding structural error is high. | 2 | 2 |
Granzer v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Mr. Tarpey asserts “[t]he court’s selective closure [of the courtroom] to all but BS and her advocate violated [his] right to a public trial[,]” which “constitutes structural error and requires automatic reversal and remand for a new trial.” The State asserts Mr. Tarpey waived his right to challenge the use of the audio broadcast. [¶34] A structural error “is a defect ‘affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply errors in the trial process itself.’” Anderson, ¶ 20, 327 P.3d at 95 (citing Granzer v. State, 2008 WY 118, ¶ 16 , 193 P.3d 266, 271 (Wyo. 2008)). 2023Mr. Tarpey asserts “[t]he court’s selective closure [of the courtroom] to all but BS and her advocate violated [his] right to a public trial[,]” which “constitutes structural error and requires automatic reversal and remand for a new trial.” The State asserts Mr. Tarpey waived his right to challenge the use of the audio broadcast. [¶34] A structural error “is a defect ‘affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply errors in the trial process itself.’” Anderson, ¶ 20, 327 P.3d at 95 (citing Granzer v. State, 2008 WY 118, ¶ 16 , 193 P.3d 266, 271 (Wyo. 2008)). | 2 | 2 |
Weaver v. Massachusettsgreen2 sentences2021And, he contends, it is difficult to measure the effects of discrimination in jury selection. [¶16] It may be that a Batson error would qualify as a structural error on direct appeal, since it “‘affect[s] the framework within which the trial proceeds,’ rather than being ‘simply an error in the trial process itself.’” Weaver v. Massachusetts, — U.S. —, —, 137 S.Ct. 1899, 1907 , 198 L.Ed.2d 420 (2017) (alteration in original) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 , 111 S.Ct. 1246, 1265 , 113 L.Ed.2d 302 (1991)). 1 We need not decide that question, however. 2021And, he contends, it is difficult to measure the effects of discrimination in jury selection. [¶16] It may be that a Batson error would qualify as a structural error on direct appeal, since it “‘affect[s] the framework within which the trial proceeds,’ rather than being ‘simply an error in the trial process itself.’” Weaver v. Massachusetts, — U.S. —, —, 137 S.Ct. 1899, 1907 , 198 L.Ed.2d 420 (2017) (alteration in original) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 , 111 S.Ct. 1246, 1265 , 113 L.Ed.2d 302 (1991)). 1 We need not decide that question, however. | 1 | 2 |
Estrada-Sanchez v. Stategreen2 sentences2020“The purpose of the structural error doctrine is to ensure insistence on certain basic, 12 [¶32] An information must “(1) contain the elements of the offense charged; (2) fairly inform a defendant of the charges against which he must defend; and (3) enable a defendant to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” Spagner, ¶ 10, 200 P.3d at 799 (citing Estrada-Sanchez v. State, 2003 WY 45, ¶ 13 , 66 P.3d 703, 708 (Wyo. 2003)). 2020“The purpose of the structural error doctrine is to ensure insistence on certain basic, 12 [¶32] An information must “(1) contain the elements of the offense charged; (2) fairly inform a defendant of the charges against which he must defend; and (3) enable a defendant to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” Spagner, ¶ 10, 200 P.3d at 799 (citing Estrada-Sanchez v. State, 2003 WY 45, ¶ 13 , 66 P.3d 703, 708 (Wyo. 2003)). | 1 | 1 |
Allen Joseph Collins v. Stategreen2 sentences2017Collins v. State, 2015 WY 92, ¶ 10 , 354 P.3d 55, 57 (Wyo. 2015). 2017Collins v. State, 2015 WY 92, ¶ 10 , 354 P.3d 55, 57 (Wyo. 2015). | 1 | 1 |
Joseph Francolino v. Robert Kuhlman, Superintendent, Sullivan Correctional Facility, and Eliot L. Spitzer, Attorney General, New Yorkgreen1 sentence2014Even the case cited by Mr. Anderson, Francolino v. Kuhlman, 365 F.3d 137, 141 (2d Cir.2004), held that "conviction under a judicial assignment system that invokes concerns about impartiality does not, by itself, deprive [the petitioner] of a neutral and impartial judge," and affirmed the district court's denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus. [119] Mr. Anderson does not suggest that there is any basis to overcome the presumption of judicial impartiality. 3 He instead argues that he need not establish prejudice because the prosecutor's conduct rose to the level of structural error. [ | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wyoming. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sullivan v. Louisiana
green
2 sentences2017In Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the failure to properly allocate the burden of proof is a structural error: [T]he essential connection to a “beyond a reasonable doubt” factual finding cannot be made where the instructional error consists of a misdescription of the burden of proof, which vitiates all the jury’s findings. 2017In Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the failure to properly allocate the burden of proof is a structural error: [T]he essential connection to a “beyond a reasonable doubt” factual finding cannot be made where the instructional error consists of a misdescription of the burden of proof, which vitiates all the jury’s findings. | 3 | 2008–2017 |
Tortolito v. State
green
2 sentences2025In Tortolito, 901 P.2d at 390 , we held: Prosecutorial violations are subject to the Clenin rule’s mandate that failure to respect the constitutional right of the citizen-accused not to have his silence called to the jury’s attention will entitle the accused to a reversal of conviction. 2025In Tortolito, 901 P.2d at 390 , we held: Prosecutorial violations are subject to the Clenin rule’s mandate that failure to respect the constitutional right of the citizen-accused not to have his silence called to the jury’s attention will entitle the accused to a reversal of conviction. | 2 | 2025–2025 |
Kyle Joseph Anderson v. The State of Wyoming
green
1 sentence2023Mr. Tarpey asserts “[t]he court’s selective closure [of the courtroom] to all but BS and her advocate violated [his] right to a public trial[,]” which “constitutes structural error and requires automatic reversal and remand for a new trial.” The State asserts Mr. Tarpey waived his right to challenge the use of the audio broadcast. [¶34] A structural error “is a defect ‘affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply errors in the trial process itself.’” Anderson, ¶ 20, 327 P.3d at 95 (citing Granzer v. State, 2008 WY 118, ¶ 16 , 193 P.3d 266, 271 (Wyo. 2008)). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Spagner v. State
green
2 sentences2020“The purpose of the structural error doctrine is to ensure insistence on certain basic, 12 [¶32] An information must “(1) contain the elements of the offense charged; (2) fairly inform a defendant of the charges against which he must defend; and (3) enable a defendant to plead an acquittal or conviction in bar of future prosecutions for the same offense.” Spagner, ¶ 10, 200 P.3d at 799 (citing Estrada-Sanchez v. State, 2003 WY 45, ¶ 13 , 66 P.3d 703, 708 (Wyo. 2003)). 2020“A detailed affidavit attached to the information may provide some of this information.” Spagner, ¶ 10, 200 P.3d at 799 . [¶33] The facts in this case are nearly identical to those in Spagner. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Jeremiah Ethan Samuel Shull v. State
green
1 sentence2017We compared the error to the error in Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993), where the Supreme Court found that the failure to instruct the jury that the government had the burden to prove each element of the charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt was a structural error because, it “vitiates all the jury’s findings.” Shull, ¶ 43, 388 P.3d at 773 , (quoting Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 281 , 113 S.Ct. at 2082 ). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Chapman v. California
yellow
2 sentences2008Being simple trial errors, instructional errors that are preserved at trial warrant analysis under the harmless constitutional error standard described in Chapman v. California, 886 U.S. 18 , 28-24, 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). 2008Being simple trial errors, instructional errors that are preserved at trial warrant analysis under the harmless constitutional error standard described in Chapman v. California, 886 U.S. 18 , 28-24, 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.