State v. Rodriguez
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentSanders, J.
(dissenting) — The majority in effect holds Marcelino J. Rodriguez’s constitutional right to a fair trial was violated when Arnulfo Ojeda was allowed to testify in *273prison garb, handcuffs, and shackles.5 I agree. I however part ways with the majority on the remedy, because the majority provides none.
I. Abuse of Discretion: A Mistrial Should Have Been Granted
When a defendant’s constitutional right to a fair trial has been violated and he moves for mistrial, the motion should be granted. State v. Weber, 99 Wn.2d 158, 165, 659 P.2d 1102 (1983); State v. Essex, 57 Wn. App. 411, 415, 788 P.2d 589…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Estelle v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Holbrook v. FlynnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State Ex Rel. Carroll v. JunkerWashington Supreme Court · 1971
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.