Analyzing error types: trial versus structural error
Also stated as: Distinguishing structural errors from trial process errors
The pages courts cite for it
- Cited for: Analyzing error types: trial versus structural error
- Cited for: Analyzing structural defects in trial mechanism errors
- Cited for: Distinguishing trial error from structural defects
Ranked by how often Washington courts cite each page. The bar is how citing opinions treated that page (green followed, yellow questioned or limited, red negative); a red or yellow chip is the case’s own overall treatment.
Washington opinions citing these pages
- In re Pers. Restraint of Meredith, 422 P.3d 458 (Wash. 2018)
- State v. Frawley, No. 80727-2 (Wash. Sept. 25, 2014)
- State v. Frawley, 334 P.3d 1022 (Wash. 2014)
- State v. Bennett, 161 Wash. 2d 303 (2007)
- State v. Vreen, 26 P.3d 236 (Wash. 2001)
- State v. Evans, 998 P.2d 373 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000)
- State v. Evans, 100 Wash. App. 757 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000)
From the opinions citing the top pages above (up to 400 per page are read), most pages cited first, then newest.
Nearest issues
- 14 opinions
- 9 opinions
- 13 opinions
Filed under: Harmless and Plain Error Analysis
Where else it is alive
Opinions per jurisdiction citing these pages. A span that stops early can mean the doctrine was dropped there.
How this is built: each issue is a set of opinion pages that later courts cite for the same proposition, grouped from what the citing courts wrote. Names are machine-written from those citations; read the cases before relying on them. Search case law