Summary
trying defendant in prison garb rather than civilian attire subject to harmless error analysis
Summary of this case from Williams v. CainOpinion
No. 74-1601. Summary Calendar.
Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.
August 2, 1974. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied October 16, 1974.
Donald L. Kraemer, Staff Counsel, Huntsville, Tex., for petitioner-appellant.
John L. Hill, Atty. Gen., Sarah Shirley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for respondent-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and THORNBERRY and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was tried and convicted in Texas state court for assault with intent to murder. He seeks federal habeas corpus relief on the grounds he was tried in prison garb, rather than in civilian clothing, which we have granted on a number of occasions. Hernandez v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1971, 443 F.2d 634, Brooks v. State of Texas, 5 Cir., 1967, 381 F.2d 619, accord, Gaito v. Brierley, 3 Cir., 1973, 485 F.2d 86.
However, an examination of the evidentiary record in this case reflects beyond a reasonable doubt appellant's guilt. We therefore hold the infraction to be harmless error. Thomas v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1973, 474 F.2d 981.
Affirmed.