of Special Appeals' opinion states that the charges against respondent were lodged in the Spring of 1998. The respondent maintains, on the other hand, that the charges were brought in the latter part of 1997. Since the murder was alleged to have been committed in February, 1998, the respondent was charged in the Spring of 1998 and is alleged to have made the admissions to S. Williams while in the Baltimore City jail on the murder charge and S. Williams reported them to Officer Massey in March, 1998, it is likely that the respondent's version is more accurate. 4 . The correct standard is "reasonable possibility,” a standard articulated by this Court in Dorsey v. State to determine whether improperly admitted evidence contributed to a conviction applies. 276 Md. 638, 350 A.2d 665 (1976) (<HOLDING>). See also Yorke v. State, 315 Md. 578, 556
holding that harmless error test is satisfied when there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction holding that an error is harmless if there is no reasonable possibility that it contributed to the conviction holding that the reviewing court must thus be satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that evidence complained of whether erroneously admitted or excluded may have contributed to rendition of guilty verdict holding that under the harmless error standard an appellate court must determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction holding that error is considered harmless if it is established beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict or alternatively stated that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction