context: A claim of unconstitutional shackling is subject to a harmless error analysis. In order to succeed on such claim, a defendant must show prejudice, that is, "a substantial or injurious effect or influence on the jury's verdict."
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.parenthetical: defendant's mere appearance in handcuffs during jury selection does not indicate the incident "inflamed or prejudiced" the jurors against him
citation_a.sentence: Hutchinson, 135 Wn.2d at 888. Accord State v. Early, 70 Wn. App. 452, 462, 853 P.2d 964 (1993) (defendant’s mere appearance in handcuffs during jury selection does not indicate the incident “inflamed or prejudiced” the jurors against him), review denied, 123 Wn.2d 1004, 868 P.2d 872 (1994).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 33 Wn. App. 435, 435
citation_b.parenthetical: it is not reversible error simply because jurors see a defendant wearing shackles
citation_b.sentence: See also Gosser, 33 Wn. App. at 435 (it is not reversible error simply because jurors see a defendant wearing shackles).