Opinion ID: 2508188
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading:  Juror Buchanan

Text: Davis argues the trial court erred by finding [j]uror Michael Buchanan did not see [Davis] in leg restraints. [65] After testifying on direct examination at the reference hearing that he had been contacted after Davis's trial by the State's investigator, Kenneth Swanson, the following colloquy between Buchanan and Davis's counsel took place: Q: Did you tell Mr. Swanson that you saw shackles, saw Mr. Davis in shackles? A: Yes, sir, if you could call them shackles. Again, I noticed a shiny device around his ankles. I don't know what a shackle looks like. Q: Did you conclude after you saw the shiny device that the shiny device was leg shackles? A: Yes, sir. Q: How many times did you see that? A: I don't remember. Q: Did you tell Mr. Swanson that you saw them twice? A: I believe. Q: Is that what your declaration says? A: Again, we are talking about five years ago, six years ago. I believe that I did see it twice.[ [66] ] Buchanan later clarified that it was during the guilt phase of Davis's trial that he noticed the shiny device around Davis's ankles that he concluded were leg shackles. [67] Furthermore, Buchanan maintained his position under cross-examination by the State: Q: Is it your testimony that on two occasions you saw something shiny on Mr. Davis' boots that you believed to be restraints? A: I believe that's a fair statement. Q: Okay. And this was during the trial, not the penalty phase? A: Right. [68] Buchanan's own testimony makes clear he saw Davis wearing leg restraints on two occasions during the guilt phase of Davis's trial. Accordingly, the trial court's finding that Buchanan did not see Davis in leg restraints is clearly erroneous and thus we disregard the trial court's finding on this point.