This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

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 2

Brian M. Hoffstadt

Associate 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...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
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 up for Daily Journal emails