United States v. Sanchez-Gomez

Defendants challenged a policy in which judges of the Southern District of California have deferred to the recommendation of the United States Marshals to place pretrial detainees in full shackle restraints for most appearances before a judge, including arraignments, unless a judge specifically requests the restraints be removed in a particular case. The court held that a full restraint policy ought to be justified by a commensurate need. It cannot rest primarily on the economic strain of the jailer to provide adequate safeguards. The court reiterated that it recognized in United States v. Howard that such a policy must be adopted with “adequate justification of its necessity.” In this case, the Southern District has failed to provide adequate justification for its restrictive shackling policy. Therefore, the court vacated the district court's orders and remanded. View "United States v. Sanchez-Gomez" on Justia Law