Whether a constitutional error in the admission of evidence is harmless based on the strength of the untainted proof or the error's contribution to the verdict

QUESTION PRESENTED Eight years ago, this Court granted review in Vasquez v. United States, No. 11-199 (U.S.) , to consider the proper approach to determining whether a constitutional error is harmless, an issue that arises in countless cases every year in both the federal and state courts. The Court did not decide the matter, as it later dismissed the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted. This case raises a similar issue to the one that went unresolved in Vasquez. Specifically, the issue is: In determining whether constitutional error in the admission of evidence is harmless, should a reviewing court focus on whether the error contributed to the verdict, or does an appellate court’s view of the untainted proof as strong or overwhelming render the constitutional error harmless? i STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES There are no related cases. ii