Criminal Procedure — right to testify — harmless error

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — right to testify — harmless error

Harmless error review applies to a circuit court’s denial of a defendant’s right to testify.

“[A]ccepting Nelson’s test would divorce the doctrine of harmless error from its purpose. Harmless error developed from the criticism that ‘[r]eversal for error, regardless of its effect on the judgment, encourages litigants to abuse the judicial process and bestirs the public to ridicule it.’ Neder, 527 U.S. at 18 (quoting R. Traynor, The Riddle of Harmless Error 50 (1970)). Its application does not ‘reflect[] a denigration of the constitutional rights involved.’ Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 577 (1986). Rather, it ‘strikes the appropriate balance between the judicial system’s interest in obtaining reliable results and the system’s competing interest in having litigation end at some point.’ Momon, 18 S.W.3d at 167. In other words, it furthers ‘the principle that the central purpose of a criminal trial is to decide the factual question of the defendant’s guilt or innocence.’ Id. at 165 (quoting Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. at 681). As such, it makes sense to define the structural/trial error dichotomy by an error’s capacity for assessment, rather than the nature or importance of the right the error affected.”

Affirmed.

2012AP2140-CR State v. Nelson

Roggensack, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Velasquez, Michelle L., Madison; For Respondent: King, Gary M., Eau Claire; O’Neil, Aaron R., Madison