Talk:Harmless error

Comment

209.147.120.110 (talk) 02:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)can someone explain harmless error to me in lamemen's terms because it is really confusing and im doing a government project on arizona v. fulminante which deals with that and i dont get it:([reply]

standard

Can someone knowledgeable on the subject (with sources) say more about the standard used to determine if error is harmless, either in federal cases or various state cases? Does it differ? Is there a definitive U.S. Supreme Court pronouncement on the subject? The article currently somewhat vaguely mentions a standard that an error isn't harmless if: "on the balance of probabilities, [the case would have] resulted in the opposite determination of fact". It then quotes a somewhat different standard from the Wyoming Supreme Court that an error isn't harmless if: "a reasonable possibility exists that, in the absence of the error, the verdict might have been more favorable to the accused". --Delirium (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A seminal case on the harmless error standard is Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967). Another good case is Fahy v. State of Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 (1963). A more modern case is Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (1991). I know the prior post is three years old, but my hope is someone can use this information to rewrite this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elreynolds04 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]