This doctrine presupposesthat the identity of the decision-makeris irrelevant so long as the subsequent decision-making body (an appellate court) believes that its decision was the correct one, regardless of its authority to make that decision. The harmless error doctrine expressed in the California Constitution and Code of Civil Procedure section 475 is properly applied to challenges to verdicts and judgments on the basis of errors in pretrial or trial decisions. In civil appeals the doctrine may bar reversal when an appellant fails to persuade that an error prejudiced the verdict.

Absent proof of resulting prejudice, abuse of discretion cannot be shown. (/d.; see also Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 475 (“No... decision... shall be reversed... unless it shall appear from the record that such error, ruling, instruction, or defect was prejudicial, and... by reason of such error, ruling, instruction, or defect, the said party... appealing sustained and suffered substantial injury...’’). If Appellant believes he has been harmedbythetrial court’s ruling, the fault lies with him.