To continue on with the types of errors encountered in reviewing cases on appeal, let's examine errors that constitute "reversible error per se."
"Reversible error per se” occurs when the error is inherently prejudicial, and thus, the appellant is not required to demonstrate actual prejudice. These errors frequently involve constitutional issues, such as where a party is deprived of the right to a fair hearing or a jury trial. “A structural error requires reversal without regard to the strength of the evidence or other circumstances.” (In re Enrique G. (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 676, 685.) If such errors are committed, the appellant is almost guaranteed a reversal because the impaired right is so fundamental that prejudice is presumed. It may occur where the court denies the parties the right to a jury trial (Martin v. County of Los Angeles (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 688, 697-698), the denial of a party’s right to testify or present evidence (Kelly v. New West Fed. Sav. (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 659, 677), the denial of the right to cross-examine witnesses (Fremont Indem. Co. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 965, 971), and the trial court’s failure to render a statement of decision after a timely request. (Marriage of Ananeh-Firempong (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 272, 282-284.)
If an appellant can show that an error is “reversible per se,” then the burden falls on the respondent to present an adequate record to demonstrate the error was harmless. If the respondent fails to do so, the appellant can win the appeal just by demonstrating the error occurred. (Lankster v. Alpha Beta Co. (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 678, 683-684.)