In re JAIME MEJIA JASSO, Part II
Failure of defense counsel to object to shackling of defendant prison inmate and to requirement that he wear prison garb at trial constituted ineffective assistance where no claim was made that shackling was necessary. The fact that the jury would inevitably have discovered that Defendant was a state prisoner did not render wearing of prison garb non-prejudicial, since such clothing emphasized defendant's custodial status. Shackling was prejudicial where it prevented defendant from taking notes during testimony and distracted him, particularly since evidence of his guilt was less than overwhelming, and prejudice was not cured by cautionary instruction.
An order was issued to show cause returnable before the superior court directing the Attorney General to show cause why defendant's remaining convictions for transportingcontrolled substances should not be reversed due to ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel's failure to object to the shackles and prison garb.
Comments on In re JAIME MEJIA JASSO, Part II