41 L.Ed.2d 590 (1974) (specifically referring to nonconstitutional standard). 31 . See, e.g.: D.C.Cir.: United States v. Clark, 337 U.S.App. D.C. 278, 184 F.3d 858, 869 (1999) (citing case establishing standard for non-constitutional error); 1st Cir.: United States v. Legarda, 17 F.3d 496, 498-99 (citing Kotteakos and Fed. R.Crim.P. 52(a) for review of erroneous exclusion of hearsay; "defendant was allowed to put on a defense, even if not q L.Ed.2d 628 (1992); United States v. Webster, 750 F.2d 307, 330-31 (1984) (noting that court has in the past used both constitutional and non-constitutional standards, court held exclusion of hearsay to be harmless error), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1106, 105 S.Ct. 2340, 85 L.Ed.2d 855 (1985); 6th Cir.: United States v. Branham, 97 F.3d 835 (1996) (<HOLDING>); 7th Cir.: United States v. Norwood, 798 F.2d
holding that a violation of the hearsay rule was harmless holding that erroneous admission of hearsay medical notes was harmless error when doctor testified and was subject to crossexamination holding erroneous exclusion of hearsay did not deny defendant a substantial right holding erroneous exclusion of hearsay harmless under fedrcrimp 52a holding exclusion was harmless error