Does the Attorney General's error in admitting evidence of a defendant's inconsistent testimony in the prosecution's case in chief, rather than for impeachment purposes, be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Matthew W. (In re Matthew W.), 281 Cal.Rptr.3d 156, 66 Cal.App.5th 392 (Cal. App. 2021):
harm him. The Attorney General therefore maintains that to the extent the evidence of defendant's statements was erroneously admitted during the prosecution's case in chief, rather than for impeachment purposes following defendant's inconsistent testimony, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. (See People v. Wood (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 803, 810, 127 Cal.Rptr.2d 132.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is admitting an error in admitting a statement made by the Attorney General harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have any authority to charge the jury on how to relate the evidence of that defense to the prosecution's general burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
If defendant fails to establish all the errors of the trial court as a cumulative result of the cumulative error, can he continue to argue that the cumulative effect of the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and mandates reversal? (California, United States of America)
Is the error by the Attorney General harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the doctrine of reasonable doubt apply to a defendant's due process right to appeal against a jury verdict that diminished the prosecution's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
How has the prosecution and defense argued that the error in Beeman error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is Defendant's contention that erroneous admission of uncharged misconduct evidence should be evaluated under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard for federal constitutional error? (California, United States of America)
What is the federal harmless error standard for determining that an error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have to prove that the error in an instruction provided to a jury in a civil case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General's error in instructing a jury to convict a defendant of embezzling a vehicle constitute a harmless error? (California, United States of America)
