Requesting a Mistrial Because Jurors Seen Defendant In Chains
In Heiney v. State, 447 So. 2d 210, 214 (Fla. 1984), Heiney argued that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial "based on his allegation that some of the jurors may have momentarily seen him in chains on two occasions while he was being transported to and from the courtroom."
The trial court denied the motion stating that "if any of the jurors even saw Heiney, it was only for a fleeting moment in the corridor." Id.
On appeal, this Court concluded that the sighting was "was not so prejudicial as to require a mistrial." Id.
This Court explained that, while it is not permissible to force a defendant to stand trial in prison garb or handcuffs over his objection, the inadvertent sight of a defendant in handcuffs or prison clothes by the jurors is not so prejudicial that it requires a mistrial. Id.