October Term 2008 · Docket 07-544
Does a jury instruction error require automatic reversal or harmless error review?
The parties dispute whether a flawed jury instruction mandates a new trial or allows courts to ignore the mistake if it did not affect the verdict.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Friedlander argued the Ninth Circuit was wrong to call the error a structural defect.
Mr. O'Connell acknowledged the error is subject to the Brecht prejudice standard.
Mr. Shah argued the Court should hold the error is not structural and subject to harmless error review.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-47 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-47
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests how courts handle mistakes in jury instructions. One side argues the error is structural and voids the trial. The other side argues the error is harmless if it did not change the outcome.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 15, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to apply harmless error review to the jury instruction mistake.
the opposing side wants the Court to treat the error as structural and require a new trial.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the error is not structural and fits the harmless error standard.
the opposing side argues the error is structural and cannot be ignored under the harmless error rule.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
What the justices asked
Justice Alito asked when an erroneous theory submitted to a jury would not have a substantial effect.
Justice Stevens asked if the California Supreme Court gave an incorrect explanation for its harmless error finding.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-47 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-47
Why it matters
This dispute defines when courts must ignore jury instruction mistakes. It determines whether a flawed instruction automatically voids a trial or allows a verdict to stand if the mistake did not influence the jury's decision.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-47 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-47
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 9-39 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 9-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-11
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.