Fahy v. Connecticut

Background

A man (Fahy) and his codefendant were convicted in Connecticut for painting swastikas on a Norwalk synagogue. At their trial a can of black paint and a paint brush were admitted into evidence over objection. The Connecticut high court later held the paint and brush had been seized by police in an illegal search and that the earlier Mapp decision applied, but it still called the error harmless and affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court granted review.

Reasoning

The central question the Court addressed was whether admitting the paint and brush taken without a warrant could reasonably have contributed to the guilty verdict. The Court assumed the seizure was illegal under the Mapp rule and focused on whether the error was harmless. It reviewed the record and found the physical items were directly used to support the officer’s testimony, to match the markings on the synagogue, and to bolster other testimony and confessions. Because there was a reasonable possibility the illegally seized items affected the jury’s decision, the Court concluded the error was prejudicial and not harmless.

Real world impact

The Court reversed the conviction and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. The decision gives the defendant a chance to show at a new trial that admissions or confessions were influenced by the illegally seized items. The opinion does not settle whether a single national standard for harmless error always applies to such situations.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Harlan (joined by three others) dissented, arguing the Court should have left the state court’s harmless-error conclusion in place and would have affirmed the conviction.