EUGENE E. MALLONEE, APPELLANT,
v.
SIDNEY LANIER, WARDEN, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A defendant's mere possibility of being seen in handcuffs in court, without evidence of actual jury observation, is insufficient to establish prejudice and deny a fair trial.
Petitioner, serving a life sentence for rape, filed a habeas corpus proceeding alleging a due process violation. The primary claim was that he was bro…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Due Process Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Mallonee is confined in the Texas State Penitentiary serving a sentence of life imprisonment resulting from his conviction of the offense of rape. He brought this habeas corpus proceeding alleging that he had been deprived of his liberty without due process of law. This is an appeal from a judgment discharging the writ and remanding petitioner to the custody of the respondent warden.
The principal assignment of error is the finding of the district judge that Mallonee was not denied a fair trial, simply because he was brought to the state court room in handcuffs, which were removed promptly upon arrival there. There was no showing that appellant was observed in handcuffs by any member of the jury. At the most, we have a showing of a possibility of prejudice. This is not enough. Prejudice must be established “not as a matter of speculation but as a demonstrable reality.” 1
A careful examination of the record compels a conclusion that all grounds urged by appellant as a basis for reversal lack merit. The judgment of the district court is
Affirmed.
. Adams v. United States ex rel. McCann, 317 U.S. 269, 281; 63 S.Ct. 236, 242; 87 L.Ed. 268, 143 A.L.R. 435.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hernandez v. Beto, 443 F.2d 634 (5th Cir. 1971)
-
Brooks v. State OF Tex., 381 F.2d 619 (5th Cir. 1967)
-
Webster v. Estelle, 505 F.2d 926 (5th Cir. 1974)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Adams v. United States ex rel. McCANN, 317 U.S. 269 (U.S. 1942)