Espinoza

Introduction

Petitioner, a defendant in a criminal trial, seeks to prohibit the county sheriff’s department from supplying the bailiff in petitioner’s trial, in which deputies from that sheriff’s department will also testify for the prosecution. Petitioner contends that the common affiliation of bailiff and sheriff’s deputy witnesses imposes too great a burden on defense attempts to demonstrate that the sheriffs deputy witnesses lack credibility. Petitioner argues that the bailiff will communicate to jurors the bailiffs belief in the credibility of sheriff’s deputy witnesses. Petitioner also argues that the proper performance of the bailiffs duties will influence jurors favorably toward the sheriffs deputy witnesses. Jurors’ perception of the common affiliation of bailiff and deputy witnesses, petitioner concludes, deprives him of a fair trial.

We find neither a constitutional nor an evidentiary basis for these contentions, however, and deny a writ of mandamus and prohibition seeking to disqualify a sheriff’s deputy from acting as bailiff. A violation of the due process right to a fair trial may occur when the same sheriffs deputy testifies about evidence significant to…