Court Opinion

ID: 9547221
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:43:51.89226+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:17:28.780780
License: Public Domain

McInturff, J.
(concurring) — Although I agree in substance with the rationale and result reached by our decision, condoning the defendant being presented in leg irons and manacles before a jury to hear the verdict, without a reason given, offends my concept of due process as it sullies the purpose of article 1, section 22, of our state constitution. That constitutional provision is intended to preserve the freedom of an accused to defend himself untrammeled by manacles when brought into the presence of the court for trial. The courtroom’s alter ego is not a cell — it is the fairness exacted by our concept of justice.
Petition for rehearing denied February 6, 1975.
Review denied by Supreme Court September 26, 1975.