Anthony Clark Odom v. Jerry B. Adger, et al.

In Chapman v. California this Court held that Constitutional errors may be found harmless only if the prosecution establishes “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the error “did not contribute to the verdict obtained.” 386 U.S. 18, 24 (1967). In Sullivan v. Louisiana, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment requires that a court must examine “the basis on which the jury actually rested its verdict,”. The proper inquiry is “whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely un-attributable to the error.” 508 U.S. 275, 279 (1993). Sullivan further suggested that the absence of a jury verdict on every element of an offense can never be harmless. In Neder this Court found an exception to Sullivan reasoning that where the evidence is overwhelming and a crime element is undisputed, a failure to instruct on a crime element is not a structural error. 527 U.S. 1 (1999). The question presented is: Whether there is a structural error in a trial when a court directs a verdict as to a contested element of the crime charged, at the close of the State’s case in chief, denying the Defendant an opportunity to offer proof or argue an element, and where the jury is instructed to not debate that crime element.