issue of harmless error in Georgia

5 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1978–1997 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Georgia 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 (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
Newman v. Greergreen gactapp · 1974 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 2 sentences 1997Compare Newman v. Greer, 131 Ga. App. 128, 131-132 ( 205 SE2d 486 ). 1997Compare Newman v. Greer, 131 Ga. App. 128, 131-132 ( 205 SE2d 486 ).	1	1
Ramsey v. Stategreen gactapp · 1983 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992 2 sentences 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant's request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error. 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant's request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error.	1	1
Rivers v. Stategreen ga · 1982 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986 2 sentences 1986Ford v. State, 255 Ga. 81 ( 335 SE2d 567 ) (1985); Rivers v. State, 250 Ga. 303, 309 ( 298 SE2d 1 ) (1982). 3. 1986Ford v. State, 255 Ga. 81 ( 335 SE2d 567 ) (1985); Rivers v. State, 250 Ga. 303, 309 ( 298 SE2d 1 ) (1982). 3.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (21)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Whiteside green nc · 1989 2 sentences 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant’s request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error. 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant's request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error.	1	1992–1992
Lancaster v. State green texapp · 1988 2 sentences 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant’s request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error. 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant's request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error.	1	1992–1992
Hodges v. State green gactapp · 1990 2 sentences 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant's request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error. 1992Pretermitting the question whether it was error to deny appellant's request to show the videotapes during closing argument (compare Hodges v. State, 194 Ga. App. 837 (3) ( 392 SE2d 262 ) with North Carolina v. Whiteside, 383 SE2d 911 (Sup. Ct. N.C.) and Lancaster v. Texas, 772 SW2d 137 (3-5) (CA Tex.); see also Ramsey v. State, 165 Ga. App. 854, 859 (7) ( 303 SE2d 32 )) is the issue of harmless error.	1	1992–1992
Ford v. State green ga · 1985 2 sentences 1986Ford v. State, 255 Ga. 81 ( 335 SE2d 567 ) (1985); Rivers v. State, 250 Ga. 303, 309 ( 298 SE2d 1 ) (1982). 3. 1986Ford v. State, 255 Ga. 81 ( 335 SE2d 567 ) (1985); Rivers v. State, 250 Ga. 303, 309 ( 298 SE2d 1 ) (1982). 3.	1	1986–1986
Hill v. State neutral ga · 1977 2 sentences 1982Thus, even though we hold that it was not necessary to set aside that conviction, we do not reinstate the conviction for possession of a firearm during commission of a felony. 8 In finding that this charge may violate due process, we necessarily overrule the pre-Sandstrom case of Hill v. State, 239 Ga. 836 ( 239 SE2d 21 ) (1977). 9 Indeed, in Sandstrom itself, after the United States Supreme Court concluded that the trial court’s charge on intent could have been interpreted as creating either a burden-shifting presumption or, as here, a conclusive presumption, the Court stated that the Supreme 1982Thus, even though we hold that it was not necessary to set aside that conviction, we do not reinstate the conviction for possession of a firearm during commission of a felony. 8 In finding that this charge may violate due process, we necessarily overrule the pre-Sandstrom case of Hill v. State, 239 Ga. 836 ( 239 SE2d 21 ) (1977). 9 Indeed, in Sandstrom itself, after the United States Supreme Court concluded that the trial court’s charge on intent could have been interpreted as creating either a burden-shifting presumption or, as here, a conclusive presumption, the Court stated that the Supreme	1	1982–1982
Dampier v. State green ga · 1980 2 sentences 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Westbrook v. State green ga · 1978 2 sentences 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Hardy v. State neutral ga · 1981 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Pryor v. State green ga · 1977 2 sentences 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Shirley v. State green ga · 1980 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Ruffin v. State green ga · 1979 2 sentences 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Witt v. Florida green scotus · 1977 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Morgan v. State green ga · 1978 2 sentences 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Jackson v. Florida green scotus · 1979 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Illinois Office of Education v. Jennings green scotus · 1979 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Jankowski v. United States green scotus · 1979 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Fiore v. Massachusetts green scotus · 1980 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Town of Southampton v. Troyer green scotus · 1980 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Sandstrom v. Montana green scotus · 1979 1 sentence 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Hardy v. State green ga · 1980 2 sentences 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197 1982Sandstrom v. Montana, supra, 442 U. S. at 526-27 . 10 See also United States v. Frady, - U. S. - (102 SC -, 71 LE2d 816) (1982); Mason v. Balkcom, supra, at [7]. 11 “Although the prosecutor is prohibited from commenting on the defendant’s failure to testify, the prosecutor can argue to the jury the inferences to be drawn from the defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, who are competent to testify and who allegedly would give evidence favorable to the defendant.” (Cits. omitted.) Shirley v. State, supra, 245 Ga. at 618 . 12 The six cases are: Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 ( 234 SE2d 918 ) (197	1	1982–1982
Miranda v. Arizona green scotus · 1966 1 sentence 1978In Miranda v. Arizona, supra, the United States Supreme Court promulgated the following rules pertaining to police interrogation of a suspect: ". . . the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination.	1	1978–1978

Where else courts name it

CA 13 (1984–2025) WI 11 (2001–2026) PA 9 (1980–2020) MD 6 (1986–2026) IA 6 (1983–2016) GA 5 (1978–1997) MI 5 (1971–2018) DC 5 (1979–2025) LA 5 (1987–1997) OH 5 (2008–2023) IL 4 (2004–2022) TX 4 (1989–2003) VA 3 (2000–2003) WA 3 (1981–2020) TN 3 (1998–2011) CT 3 (1985–2012) SC 2 (1984–1984) OR 2 (2009–2018) KS 2 (1989–1989) NC 2 (2009–2010) AL 2 (1989–1990)

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