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: see also
citation_a.identifier: 33 Wn. App. 435, 435
citation_a.parenthetical: it is not reversible error simply because jurors see a defendant wearing shackles
citation_a.sentence: See also Gosser, 33 Wn. App. at 435 (it is not reversible error simply because jurors see a defendant wearing shackles).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.parenthetical: defendant's mere appearance in handcuffs during jury selection does not indicate the incident "inflamed or prejudiced" the jurors against him
citation_b.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).