THE FIRST APPROACH FOCUSES ON THE ERRONEOUSLY ADMITTED EVIDENCE (OR OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL ERROR) TO ASK WHETHER IT MIGHT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO A GUILTY VERDICT. THE SECOND APPROACH ASKS WHETHER, ONCE ERRONEOUSLY ADMITTED EVIDENCE IS EXCLUDED, THERE REMAINS OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE JURY'S VERDICT. THE THIRD APPROACH ASKS WHETHER THE TAINTED EVIDENCE IS MERELY CUMULATIVE - THAT IS, MERE DUPLICATIVE OF SOME REAMINING ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE. THIS ARTICLE SUPPORTS RETENTION OF THE FIRST JURISDICTIONS AND OVER TIME FOR A VARIETY OF OFFENSES. ERRONEOUSLY ADMITTED EVIDENCE - ACCOMPANIED ONLY BY A NARROW CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE TEST. IN OTHER WORDS, CONSTITUTIONAL ERROR SHOULD BE DECLARED HARMLESS ONLY WHEN THE ERROR ITSELF WAS EITHER IRRELEVANT OR TRIVIAL, OR WHEN OTHER INDEPENDENT, SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR EVIDENCE INDISPUTABLY PROVED THE PROPOSITIONS TO WHICH THE TAINTED EVIDENCE WAS RELEVANT. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)