Citation network
Connecticut Vs. Johnson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 23, 1983
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 73 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Connecticut v. JohnsonSearch
-
U.S. 73 (1983) Connecticut v. JohnsonSearch
-
did not contain any further discussion of intent. While respondent's appeal was pending, this Court decided Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
Court and delivered an opinion, in which JUSTICE BRENNAN, JUSTICE WHITE, and JUSTICE MARSHALL joined. In Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
transcript, the appeal was not briefed and argued until February, 1981. In the interim, this Court decided Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
State's argument that the Sandstrom violation was harmless, seemingly relying on its recent decision in State v. TruppiSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
certiorari, the State claimed that the Sandstrom error should have been analyzed for harmlessness under Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Id. at 386 U. S. 23 , and n. 8 (citing Gideon v. WainwrightSearch
-
U. S. 510 (1927) (impartial judge)). Resolving the question reserved three years earlier in Fahy v. ConnecticutSearch
-
U.S. at 386 U. S. 24 . See also Milton v. WainwrightSearch
-
altered in Chapman, however, the Court had decided certain cases that remain instructive here. In Bollenbach v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 326 U. S. 614 . The following year, the Court decided Carpenters v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. MartinSearch
-
Carpenters v. UnitedSearch
-
Sparf & Hansen v. UnitedSearch
-
the guilty and too little weight to the method by which decisions of guilt are to be made. The Court, in Bollenbach v. UnitedSearch
-
See County Court of Ulster County v. AllenSearch
-
on the offense for which he was convicted, it would be appropriate to find the error harmless. See, e.g., Hearn v. JamesSearch
-
State v. SheldonSearch
-
addition, a Sandstrom error may be harmless if the defendant conceded the issue of intent. See, e.g., Krzeminski v. PeriniSearch
-
F.2d 121, 125 (CA6), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 866 (1980). See also Washington v. HarrisSearch
-
United States v. WinterSearch
-
may well be harmless, and have then gone on to decide whether the evidence of guilt was overwhelming. See, e.g., Lamb v. JerniganSearch
-
Jacks v. DuckworthSearch
-
People v. WrightSearch
-
State v. McKenzieSearch
-
presumption is harmless depends on whether intent was a disputed issue in the case. See, e.g., United States v. WinterSearch
-
McGuinn v. CristSearch
-
Washington v. HarrisSearch
-
People v. ThomasSearch
-
opinion). Still other courts have suggested that Sandstrom errors can never be harmless. See, e.g., Hammontree v. PhelpsSearch
-
State v. TruppiSearch
-
Conn. 449, 466, 438 A.2d 712, 721 (1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 941 (1981). See also Dietz v. SolemSearch
-
These issues are not now before us, because respondent's own petition for a writ of certiorari was denied. Johnson v. ConnecticutSearch
-
rule expounded in State v. EvansSearch
-
Conn.61, 69-70, 327 A.2d 576, 581 (1973). The decision on the merits is therefore properly before us. Engle v. IsaacSearch
-
In Truppi, the court, citing Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
permit fewer applications of the harmless error rule than does the Federal Constitution. See PruneYard Shopping Center v. RobinsSearch
-
The Supreme Court of Montana, on the remand of Sandstrom, found that the error was not harmless. State v. SandstromSearch
-
Schmolesky, County Court of Ulster County v. AllenSearch
-
This is all the Court held in Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial