Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 6/22/2007

United States v. Harrow

Citations

65 M.J. 190
2007 CAAF LEXIS 831
2007 WL 1815402

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that an error in admitting evidence is likely to be harmless when the evidence would not provide any new ammunition
1,467 days between sentencing and completion of review harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
“When a fact was already obvious from . . . the tes- timony at trial’ and the evidence in question ‘would not have produced any new ammunition,’ an error is likely to be harmless.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ryan, Baker, Erdmann, Stucky, Effron

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

50 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Harrow

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.