U.S. Supreme Court,
Constitutional Law
Aug. 26, 2011
The roles of judge and jury: Is the US Supreme Court of two minds?
The Supreme Court's treatment of the "harmless error doctrine" blurs the lines between what judges and juries may do.
2nd Appellate District, Division 5
Brian M. Hoffstadt
Presiding Justice
California Court of Appeal
UCLA School of Law, 1995
In the last 20 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has substantially altered its jurisprudence regarding what judges and juries may do in two different contexts tied to criminal cases - namely, during appellate review of jury instruction errors made by a state trial court and during sentencing. What is striking is that the Court has seemingly moved in opposing directions in these two areas.
In reviewing convictions on direct appeal, courts usually apply the "harmless error" doctrine. Th...For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In