State v. Gonzalez
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 A criminal defendant has the right to appear in court without restraints and without manifestations that he is being held in jail (such as being forced to wear prison clothing). An indigent criminal defendant also has the same right to the unqualified presumption of innocence as one who can afford to post bail. Here, the court told the jury at the outset of this trial that Martin Gonzalez could not post bail, was therefore being held in jail, was being transported to and from court in handcuffs, and that uniformed officers were guarding him in the courtroom. The question presented is…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Griffin v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Smith v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. StevensCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. JaimeWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. JaimeWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- State v. SanchezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.