| Abstrakt: |
Underlying harmless error review is the common-sense principle that courts need not retry defendants due to trial errors that did not affect the outcome of the case. Even when trial proceedings violate a defendant's constitutional rights, this doctrine allows convictions to be upheld when such a violation did not, beyond a reasonable doubt, contribute to the verdict. But should the court's interest in judicial efficiency outweigh the interests of truth-seeking and fairness? This practice is not as deeply rooted in American jurisprudence as it appears and may go far beyond the purpose it was originally intended to serve. This Note posits that Georgia should exempt constitutional errors from harmless error review. Such reform would benefit not only individual Georgians and their constitutional rights but also the court system as whole--providing clear opportunities and incentives for the positive development of trial practice. Although finding fewer errors to be harmless may add to trial dockets in the short term, this approach would ultimately decrease errors overall and ensure the protection of the substantial rights of parties. Whether by a decision of the Georgia Supreme Court or by legislative action, harmless error reform could restore protections to Georgia courts that existed for nearly two hundred years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
