7 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2022 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maryland 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 |
|---|---|---|
Holloway v. Stategreen2 sentences1985What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right ... that unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt ... that the defendant would undoubtedly have been found guilty ... its employment will always be error---- Younie v. State, 272 Md. 233, 246 , 322 A.2d 211 (1974), quoted with approval in Holloway v. State, 26 Md.App. at 395-96 , 339 A.2d 319 . 1985What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right ... that unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt ... that the defendant would undoubtedly have been found guilty ... its employment will always be error---- Younie v. State, 272 Md. 233, 246 , 322 A.2d 211 (1974), quoted with approval in Holloway v. State, 26 Md.App. at 395-96 , 339 A.2d 319 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Milton v. Wainwright
green
2 sentences2022After analyzing Chapman v. California and other Supreme Court cases, the Court in Younie distilled from them the standard of harmlessness review that applies to constitutional errors: What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right (e.g. … right not to self-incriminate – fifth amendment) then unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, as the prosecution did in Milton v. Wainwright, 407 U.S. 371 , 92 S. Ct. 2174 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1972) (where an invalid confession accom 2022After analyzing Chapman v. California and other Supreme Court cases, the Court in Younie distilled from them the standard of harmlessness review that applies to constitutional errors: What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right (e.g. … right not to self-incriminate – fifth amendment) then unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, as the prosecution did in Milton v. Wainwright, 407 U.S. 371 , 92 S. Ct. 2174 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1972) (where an invalid confession accom | 6 | 1974–2022 |
Allen v. State Board of Elections
green
2 sentences2022After analyzing Chapman v. California and other Supreme Court cases, the Court in Younie distilled from them the standard of harmlessness review that applies to constitutional errors: What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right (e.g. … right not to self-incriminate – fifth amendment) then unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, as the prosecution did in Milton v. Wainwright, 407 U.S. 371 , 92 S. Ct. 2174 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1972) (where an invalid confession accom 2022After analyzing Chapman v. California and other Supreme Court cases, the Court in Younie distilled from them the standard of harmlessness review that applies to constitutional errors: What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right (e.g. … right not to self-incriminate – fifth amendment) then unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, as the prosecution did in Milton v. Wainwright, 407 U.S. 371 , 92 S. Ct. 2174 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1972) (where an invalid confession accom | 5 | 1974–2022 |
Younie v. State
green
2 sentences1985What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right ... that unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt ... that the defendant would undoubtedly have been found guilty ... its employment will always be error---- Younie v. State, 272 Md. 233, 246 , 322 A.2d 211 (1974), quoted with approval in Holloway v. State, 26 Md.App. at 395-96 , 339 A.2d 319 . 1985What is of importance, from an examination of the cases which discuss harmless error, is the realization that if the error goes to a substantial constitutional right ... that unless the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt ... that the defendant would undoubtedly have been found guilty ... its employment will always be error---- Younie v. State, 272 Md. 233, 246 , 322 A.2d 211 (1974), quoted with approval in Holloway v. State, 26 Md.App. at 395-96 , 339 A.2d 319 . | 2 | 1975–1985 |