Court Opinion

ID: 9760257
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 00:44:58.357465+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:09.842759
License: Public Domain

SEILER, Judge,
concurring.
For the reasons stated in Judge Bard-gett’s opinion I agree that it was error to admit the testimony in question of the police officer, but I agree with Judge Donnelly that the “harmless error rule” of State v. Degraffenreid, 477 S.W.2d 57, 64 (Mo. banc 1972) is flawed and that we should follow the rule that the presumption that error is harmless is overcome only if we are able to declare that belief beyond a reasonable doubt. However, in the case before us, there is no genuine argument but that the defendant did hold up the bank and what the police officer testified to went only to the identity of the defendant as the hold-up man. Therefore, on the facts of this case, we can say with confidence that the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and the conviction should be affirmed.