Chapman v. California
| Chapman v. California | |
|---|---|
| Argued December 7–8, 1966 Decided February 20, 1967 | |
| Full case name | Ruth Elizabeth Chapman and Thomas Leroy Teale v. California |
| Docket no. | 95 |
| Citations | 386 U.S. 18 (more) 17 L. Ed. 2d 705, 87 S. Ct. 824 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Conviction (1963), affirmed, People v. Teale, 63 Cal. 2d 178 (1965) |
| Holding | |
| 1) Violations of federally-protected rights must be governed by a federal harmless-error rule, not state rules, and 2) such errors are not harmless unless the state proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Black, joined by Warren, Douglas, Clark, Brennan, White, and Fortas |
| Concurrence | Stewart |
| Dissent | Harlan |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. V, XIV | |
Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a federal "harmless error" rule must apply, instead of equivalent state rules, for reviewing trials where federally-protected rights had been violated.