Legal Opinion
Fry v. Pliler
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 11, 2007No. 06-5247PublishedCited by 925 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scalia
We decide whether a federal habeas court must assess the prejudicial impact of constitutional error in a state-court criminal trial under the “substantial and injurious effect” standard set forth in Brecht v. Abrakamson, 507 U. S. 619 (1993), when the state appellate court failed to recognize the error and did not review it for harmlessness under the “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” standard set forth in Chapman v. California, 386 U. S. 18 (1967).
I
After two mistrials on account of hung juries, a third jury convicted petitioner of the 1992 murders of James and Cynthia Bell. At trial,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by925 opinions
- Davis v. AyalaSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
- Brown v. DavenportSupreme Court of the United States · 2022
- Shinn v. Martinez RamirezSupreme Court of the United States · 2022
- Frantz v. HazeyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Moses v. PayneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
920 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.