Section 10.75 Harmless Error

• Library: App Ct Prac 2015 Supp

D. (§10.75) Harmless Error

In criminal cases, there is a presumption that errors are prejudicial. State v. Allen, 246 S.W. 946 (Mo. 1922); State v. Hulbert, 253 S.W. 764 (Mo. 1923); State v. Spencer, 472 S.W.2d 404 (Mo. 1971). This presumption, however, is not conclusive and may be overcome by the facts and circumstances of a particular case. State v. Walker, 484 S.W.2d 284 (Mo. 1972); State v. Henderson, 700 S.W.2d 105 (Mo. App. E.D. 1985). Error may be harmless. Rule 29.12(a). Errors, defects, irregularities, or variances that do not affect substantial rights may be disregarded. Another way of saying it is that a harmless error is an error without prejudice. State v. Smith, 477 S.W.2d 67 (Mo. 1972). To determine whether an error is prejudicial or harmless, the court may look at the evidence of guilt and, when that evidence is strong, find that the error was harmless because, after all, the defendant would have been convicted anyway. State v. Degraffenreid, 477 S.W.2d 57 (Mo. banc 1972); State v. Henderson. Errors that are beneficial to the defendant will also be disregarded. State v. W____ F. W____, 721 S.W.2d 145 (Mo. App. S.D. 1986).

In some instances, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that particular constitutional errors can never be harmless regardless of the degree of error. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) (right to counsel). The Court has held that some constitutional errors can be held harmless but only if the court finds them to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See Harrington v. Cal., 395 U.S. 250 (1969).

Questions in regard to the length of sentence are usually rejected when the sentence imposed was within the bounds prescribed by statute. State v. Gaye, 532 S.W.2d 783 (Mo. App. E.D. 1975). In State v....