Foreword: Symposium on Harmless Error - Part II

• Author: Stuart P. Green
• Position: L.B. Porterie Professor of Law, Louisiana State University; Director, Pugh Institute for Justice
• Pages: 1-3

Page1

L.B. Porterie Professor of Law, Louisiana State University; Director, Pugh Institute for Justice.

When an appellate court decides that an error was made by the trial court below, it must then determine whether the error was sufficiently prejudicial to require reversal. If it was not, the error is said to be "harmless." The decision that an error at trial was harmless can be particularly consequential in criminal cases, where the stakes are invariably high; the errors made can involve a violation of a defendant's constitutional rights; and there is a real risk that the appellate court will usurp the jury's role at trial by speculating on what the outcome would have been absent the error.

The subject of the articles that follow is whether and when it is appropriate for a court to make a finding of harmless error. These articles constitute Part II of a symposium on the doctrine of harmful error that is appearing in the pages of the Louisiana Law Review. Part I appeared in the Summer 1999 Issue of Volume 59, and featured articles by David McCord and Addison Goff.¹ This second half contains articles by Jim Boren and Michael Fiser, as well as Paul LeBlanc.² When the first half of this symposium appeared, I wrote another foreword, briefly describing both the theoretical interest and practical importance of the harmless error doctrine.³This time, rather than writing about the substance of the doctrine, I want to explain the impetus for this symposium.

The symposium was conceived, and is sponsored, by the George W. and Jean H. Pugh Institute for Justice, based at the LSU Law Center. George...