Michael Spencer v. Richard Kirkland

Good Law
479 F. App'x 91
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 25, 201209-16014California280 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Michael Spencer was sentenced to state prison for 121 years to life after a jury found him guilty of committing three robberies and being a felon in possession of a firearm. During his trial, Spencer was visibly restrained. Spencer argues that the manner in which he was restrained was an unreasonable application of Supreme Court precedent and based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. The district court denied Spencer’s request for habeas relief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Spencer does not challenge the trial court’s finding of a manifest need for physical restraints, and the record supports such a finding. Instead, he argues that the trial court failed to use less restrictive alternatives that would have allowed him increased movement and would have been less obvious to the jury.

The Supreme Court recognizes that “the Constitution forbids the use of visible shackles during [trial], unless that use is ‘justified by an essential state interest’— such as the interest in courtroom security — specific to the defendant on trial.” Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622, 624 , 125 S.Ct. 2007 , 161 L.Ed.2d 953 (2005). The Court has not,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.