WPC aڿ{&&;,|ASj,tW5_P 3)ɤ: 4qJp6U,='~ucŒFdPL@랟}ŧ`ܢvaFczx|T =PR> #GQ.Lo=[~C. UmB % 0 0t 0 : 0 0, 0/ 0  0 0U.e 0t 0r! 0y" 0I# 0# 0-$ 0\% 0 y& 0/' 0t' 0A) 0@) 0p +UB{, 0|, 09. 0b/ 01 01 02 0v3 04 0+5 05 0]6 06 0u7 0Z8 0y9 0s: 0z; 0; 0r!< 0< 0 /= 0`= 05? 0? 0y@ 0EA 0B 0B 0C 0|iD 0D 0nsE 0NE 0N/G 0R}H 0ZI 0)K 0zK 0zuL 0zL 0ziM 0zM]N 0GP D+PP 0Q 0=:R 0wR AQRIS :T 0=KT 0FT 0PT  U 0*+U  UU  bU oU{W\X hxXJX <*Y3fY <Y3Y <Z3DZ 6wZ0Z NZ<+[ 8g[1[  [>[ >\4V\ 0I\\ 6_ 6_0`  7`OA`  `O`  `T` dGaHa faHYb <b3b <c3LccccUc(g nDgrg \$hIh bhL+iwi nirj TsjEj L kGXk PkCk H2l TzlEl `m LsmGmn n"nrn fo fho ToE"p XgpGp Pq TVqEq Lq X;rGr RrD,s 8ps1s 8s1t 6Bt0xt Pt Jt VBulu pvXtv pvX4X` hp x (#>'    HVZ 4heading 5heading 5  /% <hDL!/          >4X` hp x (#>  H 4heading 6heading 6  ," DL!,&&&W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  H 4heading 7heading 7  ) DL!)XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  H 4heading 8heading 8  &DpL!&XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  H 4heading 9heading 9  #L!#&&&C %2A`ArialTTC        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW>4X` hp x (#>  %2A`ArialTTh:Default ParaDefault Paragraph FontXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW`:footnote reffootnote referenceXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW<5T .footerfooter   !        >4X` hp x (#>  b$ :Style Bold CStyle Bold Centered            V! :footnote texfootnote text            P! 8Body Text 2Body Text 2            P8page numberpage numberXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW\-" :Style Quote,Style Quote,left&            '    \! :E-mail SignaE-mail Signature            H4HyperlinkHyperlinkXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW            W\  `*Times New RomanTTWH! 4Body TextBody Text            Hr4bodytext1bodytext1XXXC %2A`ArialTTC        W\  `*Times New RomanTTWd:annotation rannotation referenceW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW\  `*Times New RomanTTZ :annotation tannotation text  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  Z :Comment SubjComment Subject  W\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  T} :Balloon TextBalloon Text  C %2A`ArialTTC        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  `! :Body Text InBody Text Indent 2            <5T .headerheader   !        >4X` hp x (#>  J! $1Body Text Indent 3            T :Normal (Web)Normal (Web)  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  X! :Single SpaciSingle Spacing            V! :Attorney NamAttorney Name            X! :Double SpaciDouble Spacing            H! 4Firm NameFirm Name            \:Brief Title Brief Title Char        D3( 2HeadingsHeadings&             '    H4HTML CiteHTML CiteXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW<\W .IssuesIssues  8.4 <DL!8        >4X` hp x (#>  V$ :Pet Rev IntrPet Rev Intro            8! ,QuoteQuote            T! :S Ct CaptionS Ct Caption            0! (SigSig            Z! :Signature BlSignature Block            d! :table of auttable of authorities            8 ,TitleTitle  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  L0% 6Title CapsTitle Caps&            '    P$ 8toa headingtoa heading            85T ,toc 1toc 1   T$        >4X` hp x (#>  8;W ,Toc 2Toc 2   T$        >4X` hp x (#>  H$ 4TOC TitleTOC Title            8Dc ,Toc 3Toc 3        ??  US     >4X` hp x (#>  8>T ,toc 4toc 4  d !!        >4X` hp x (#>  P8Footer CharFooter Char        L! 6TranscriptTranscript            ,! &H1H1            , &H2H2  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  , &H3H3  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  0 (parpar  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  8 ,quotequote  XXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW  x-" :Style HeadinStyle Heading 3Argument + Bold&            '    8! ,toc 5toc 5            8! ,toc 6toc 6            8! ,toc 7toc 7            8! ,toc 8toc 8            8! ,toc 9toc 9              G1~)000  _?+ 4 <DL!X?B.` hp x (#XBMNO?;z h x p @ H@Exxxxx (#(#  (#(#(Y21~$ !000  'dxd Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(Y21~$ !000  ($    (Y21~$ !000  ILJKHC<< c L1~"000  _B.` hp x (#XB  ӄ@    i  A  ԀPQR($0 ($0 0 (($0 0 0 T7($T1T2  G1~)000  $#(#X$0G        H.` hp x (##(#HMXO?;z h x p @ H@Exxxxx (#(#  (#(# L1~"000  B.` hp x (#XB  ӄ@    1  A  Ԁ_TOC535587450[California Constitution, Article VI, section 107 @_ԀCaliforniaConstitution,ArticleVI,section10]Evidence Code section 4522 )_EvidenceCodesection452_Evidence Code section 4532 )_EvidenceCodesection453aEvidence Code section 4592 )_EvidenceCodesection459cPenal Code section 1822 &_PenalCodesection182eHealth & Safety Code section 113522 2_Health&SafetyCodesection11352gPenal Code section 45732 '_PenalCodesection4573i1 4_Health&SafetyCodesection11352skPenal Code section 1170.122 *_PenalCodesection1170.12(!$        !000  _XDbX0B.` hp x (#XB                XDbXhXDbXDbXhXDb      0hXDb   1   S    XDbX0XDbXXXDb  ݀TheClerksTranscriptconsistsofonlyonevolume.Penal Code section 1170.12pPenal Code section 6542 &_PenalCodesection654r7 E_UnitedStatesConstitution,FifthAmendmentTAst7 E_UnitedStatesConstitution,SixthAmendmentTAsv7 J_UnitedStatesConstitution,FourteenthAmendmentTAsxCalifornia Constitution, Article I, section 77 >_ԀCaliforniaConstitution,ArticleI,section7zCalifornia Constitution, Article I, section 157 >_CaliforniaConstitution,ArticleI,section15|Penal Code section 1118.12 )_PenalCodesection1118.1~Penal Code section 1118.12 )_PenalCodesection1118.1_TOC535587451_TOC535587452_TOC535587453 K !  _X-XB.` hp x (#XB                X-XhX-X-XhX-      hX-  2  S    X-XX-XXX-  ݀Thisappealarisesfromtheretrialand_reconviction_Ԁofappellantonthesamechargesasreversed  bythisCourtonJuly16,2004inCaseNo.H025464._TOC535587455Deck v. Missouri (2005) __ U.S __, 125 S.Ct. 20071 h_Deckv.Missouri(2005)___U.S_Ԁ__,125S.Ct.2007Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 181 ?_Chapmanv.California(1967)386U.S.18Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 6681 B_Stricklandv.Washington(1984)466U.S.668_TOC535587456Deck v. Missouri (2005) __ U.S __, 125 S.Ct. 20071 h_Deckv.Missouri(2005)___U.S_Ԁ__,125S.Ct.2007In re Winchester (1960) 53 Cal.2d 5281 ;_InreWinchester(1960)53Cal.2d528In re Harris (1993) 5 Cal.4th 8131 =_InreHarris(1993)5Cal.4th813People v. Pope (1979) 23 Cal.3d 4121 9_Peoplev.Pope(1979)23Cal.3d412People v. Pope (1979) 23 Cal.3d 412People v. Tello (1997) 15 Cal.4th 2641 ;_Peoplev.Tello(1997)15Cal.4th264California Constitution, Article VI, section 10In re Harris (1993) 5 Cal.4th 8131 =_InreHarris(1993)5Cal.4th813_TOC535587457Deck v. Missouri (2005) __ U.S __, 125 S.Ct. 20071 h_Deckv.Missouri(2005)___U.S_Ԁ__,125S.Ct.2007Deck v. Missouri (2005) __ U.S __, 125 S.Ct. 2007Deck v. Missouri (2005) __ U.S __, 125 S.Ct. 2007Holbrook v. Flynn (1986) 475 U.S. 5601 ;_Holbrookv.Flynn(1986)475U.S.560Estelle v. Williams (1976) 425 U.S. 5011 =_Estellev.Williams(1976)425U.S.501Estelle v. Williams (1976) 425 U.S. 501Illinois v. Allen (1970) 397 U.S. 3371 ;_Illinoisv.Allen(1970)397U.S.337Illinois v. Allen (1970) 397 U.S. 337People v. Harrington (1871) 42 Cal. 1651 =_Peoplev.Harrington(1871)42Cal.165People v. Duran (1976) 16 Cal.3d 2821 :_Peoplev.Duran(1976)16Cal.3d282Penal Code section 45002 '_PenalCodesection4500Penal Code section 45022 '_PenalCodesection4502Penal Code section 6882 &_PenalCodesection688People v. Harrington (1871) 42 Cal. 165People v. Duran (1976) 16 Cal.3d 282People v. Seaton (2001) 26 Cal.4th 5981 b_Peoplev._Seaton_(2001)26Cal.4th598(United States v. Howard (9th Cir. 2005) __ F.3d __1 N_UnitedStatesv.Howard(9thCir.2005)__F.3d__(United States v. Howard (9th Cir. 2005) __ F.3d __1 N_UnitedStatesv.Howard(9thCir.2005)__F.3d__Rhoden v. Rowland (9th Cir. 1999) 172 F.3d 6331 j__Rhoden_Ԁv.Rowland(9thCir.1999)172F.3d633Duckett v. Godinez (9th Cir. 1995) 67 F.3d 7341 __Duckett_Ԁv._Godinez_(9thCir.1995)67F.3d734Spain v. Rushen (9th Cir. 1989) 883 F.2d 7121 h_Spainv._Rushen_(9thCir.1989)883F.2d712Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 181 ?_Chapmanv.California(1967)386U.S.18United States Constitution, Fifth AmendmentUnited States Constitution, Sixth AmendmentUnited States Constitution, Fourteenth AmendmentCalifornia Constitution, Article I, section 7California Constitution, Article I, section 15_TOC535587458California Constitution, Article I, section 15Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 6681 B_Stricklandv.Washington(1984)466U.S.668People v. Ledesma (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1711 \_Peoplev._Ledesma_(1987)43Cal.3d171People v. Pope (1979) 23 Cal.3d 4121 9_Peoplev.Pope(1979)23Cal.3d412People v. Howard (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 411 ?_Peoplev.Howard(1987)190Cal.App.3d41Deck v. Missouri (2005) __ U.S __, 125 S.Ct. 2007Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 181 ?_Chapmanv.California(1967)386U.S.18Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 6681 B_Stricklandv.Washington(1984)466U.S.668People v. Ledesma (1987) 43 Cal.3d 171People v. Fosselman (1983) 33 Cal.3d 5721 ^_Peoplev._Fosselman_(1983)33Cal.3d572People v. Pope (1979) 23 Cal.3d 412Penal Code section 1118.12 )_PenalCodesection1118.1Penal Code section 1118.12 )_PenalCodesection1118.1Braverman v. United States (1942) 317 U.S. 491 c__Braverman_Ԁv.UnitedStates(1942)317U.S.49Braverman v. United States (1942) 317 U.S. 49People v. Vargas (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 5061 @_Peoplev.Vargas(2001)91Cal.App.4th506People v. Morocco (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 1449Blumenthal v. United States (1947) 332 U.S. 5391 E_Blumenthalv.UnitedStates(1947)332U.S.539People v. Skelton (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 691People v. Elliot (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 6731 ?_Peoplev.Elliot(1978)77Cal.App.3d673United States v. Orozco1 _ԄPravda(2dCir.1984)732_F.United_ԀStatesv._Orozco_ԄPravda(2dCir.1984)732F.2d1076People v. Cook (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 1142Penal Code section 1118.12 )_PenalCodesection1118.1Penal Code section 1118.12 )_PenalCodesection1118.1United States Constitution, Fifth AmendmentUnited States Constitution, Sixth AmendmentUnited States Constitution, Fourteenth AmendmentCalifornia Constitution, Article I, section 15California Constitution, Article I, section 16United States Constitution, Fifth AmendmentCalifornia Constitution, Article I, section 7_TOC535587459Holbrook v. Flynn (1986) 475 U.S. 5601 ;_Holbrookv.Flynn(1986)475U.S.560_TOC535587460_TOC535587461_TOC64648152_TOC502029135_TOC523109904_TOC535587462_TOC535587463<6X9`("Courier NewTT(2$ !000  XDbX0  0  3|xZ \  `*Times New RomanTTC\  P6QP\  `*Times New RomanTTW\  P6QP\  `*Times New RomanTT&&J\  P6Q&P\  `*Times New RomanTTXXP\  P6QXP%2A`ArialTTomanTT&&Q2PQ&P%2A`ArialTTomanTTXXX2PQXP\  `*Times New RomanTT6\  P6QP%2A`ArialTTomanTT;2PQP<6X9`("Courier NewTTTT6X@DQ@(>$PPPRICOH Aficio 2045e PCL 60 db86 OPEQRESTDUVWZ E]4-work6U !000  _  H   4    <      D      L   0DL!X09 DL!DX9INTHECOURTOFAPPEALOFTHESTATEOFCALIFORNIA  E+ 4 <DL!XE3 DL!X3Q SIXTHAPPELLATEDISTRICTE+ 4 <DL!XE0 4 0 4!4!0 ! !0< ! !0<!<!0!!0D!!   < 4  INRETHEMATTEROF     D Z  Z) D!D!  4    <      D )NO.__________0 4 0 4!4!0 ! !0< ! !0<!<!0!!0D!!   < 4 JAIME_MEJIA_Ԁ_JASSO_,     D )(FiledinConjunction D!D!  4    <      D )withappealin0 4 0 4!4!0 ! !0< ! !0<!<!0!!0D!!   < OnHabeasCorpus.     D )H028593) D!D!  4    <      D )(MontereyCo. 4    <      D )SuperiorCourt 4    <      D )No.SS021615B) 4    <      D )              PETITIONFORWRITOFHABEASCORPUS  ANDBRIEFINSUPPORTTHEREOF@..    Z Z      Z ZW WV VU U       4    <     RuthMcVeigh,Esq.,SBN95876 4    <     LawOfficeofRuthMcVeigh 4    <     3675LilyStreet 4    <     Oakland,California94619 4    <     Telephone:(415)5784614 4    <     AttorneyforPetitioner 4    <     JAIME_MEJIA_Ԁ_JASSO_ 4    <     AppointedbytheCourtofAppeal 4    <     UndertheS11._ixth_ԀDistrictAppellate0 4 0 4!4!0 ! !0< ! !0<!<!  ProgramAssistedCaseSystem !! 0 4 0 4!4!0 ! !0< ! !0<!<!   !!   -)) FB.` hp x (#XB@"TABLEOFCONTENTS4   T$X      O   ??US.,_PETITIONFORWRITOFHABEASCORPUS""J(#.zz-1XDbX0 Rӈ  0XXDb /RVERIFICATIONL"L"I(#. 12XDbX0 R/ӈ  0XXDb /RPOINTSANDAUTHORITIESINSUPPORTOFPETITIONFORWRITOF `  HABEASCORPUSL"L"I(#. 13XDbX0 R/ӈ `  0XXDb /RSTATEMENTOFFACTSL"L"I(#. 13XDbX0 R/ӈ 8   4     XT$    5  ! T$X!      0XDb /RARGUMENTL"L"I(#. 19XDbX0 /ӈ `  5ZZ    ! XT$!  WWVVUU  7   X    ????.,  0 _ 0XDb INTRODUCTION#L"L"I(#. _(#_(##19XDbX0 ӈ (  0 _ 0XXDb I.THEFILINGOFTHISPETITIONALONGWITHAREQUESTTHATITBE   CONSOLIDATEDWITHPETITIONERSPENDINGDIRECTAPPEALISTHE  APPROPRIATEPROCEDURE.#L"L"I(#.#_(#_(##21XDbX0 ӈ  0 _ 0XXDb II.THETRIALCOURTSUNWARRANTEDIMPOSITIONOFVISIBLEHAND h ANDFEETSHACKLESUPONPETITIONERTHROUGHOUTHISJURYTRIALDENIEDPETITIONERHISFIFTHANDFOURTEENTHAMENDMENTRIGHTSTODUEPROCESSOFLAWANDHISSIXTHAMENDMENTRIGHTTOTHEEFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL.#L"L"I(#.4_(#_(##22XDbX0 ӈ h 0 _ 0XXDb VIVII.DEFENSECOUNSELABDICATEDHISDUTYTOEFFECTIVELY 0 REPRESENTPETITIONERBYFAILINGINANYWAYTOCHALLENGETHETRIALCOURTSFORCINGOFPETITIONERTOWEARSHACKLES 0 THROUGHOUTHISJURYTRIAL,BYFAILINGTOREQUESTTHATPETITIONERBEPERMITTEDTOAPPEARATHISTRIALINCIVILIANCLOTHESRATHERINTHANAPRISONJUMPSUIT,BYFAILINGTOMAKEAMOTIONFORJUDGMENTOFACQUITTALONTWOOFTHETHREEALLEGEDCONSPIRACYCHARGESORTOREQUESTTHETRIALCOURTINSTRUCTTHEJURYTHATITWASAQUESTIONOFFACTFORTHEJURYTODETERMINEWHETHERPETITIONERWASGUILTYORNOTGUILTYOFASINGLEOVERALLCONSPIRACYORMULTIPLESEPARATECONSPIRACIES.TRIALCOUNSELSFAILURETOACTASA 0'"$ REASONABLYCOMPETENTDEFENSELAWYERDENIED_PETITIONER 0(#% HISFEDERALANDSTATECONSTITUTIONALRIGHTSTODUEPROCESSOFLAWANDAFAIRTRIAL,ASWELLASTOTHEEFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL.#L"L"I(#.%%#_(#_(##30XDbX0 ӈ  0 _ 0XXDb CONCLUSION#L"L"I(#. _(#_(##38XDbX0 ӈ x 7cZZ??.,??.,     X  WWVVUU  4   T$X      0XXDb EXHIBITA:PETITIONERSDECLARATIONL"L"I(#.\\-39XDbX0 Rӈ @  0XXDb /REXHIBITB:TRIALCOUNSELSDECLARATIONL"L"I(#.BB143XDbX0 R/ӈ  h 0XXDb /RDECLARATIONOFWORDCOUNTL"L"I(#.  #46XDbX0 R/ӈ  @  0XXDb /RDECLARATIONOFSERVICEL"L"I(#. 47XDbX0 R/ Kӈ   0XXDb /RUS??.,4 TION     XT$         B.` hp x (#XBTABLEOFAUTHORITIES /     `     h      p      x    `     h      p      x PAGE ffd3         ffffd! #(#X!??US.,_ConstitutionalProvisions ff  d 3&Z Z      W WV VU U  SLA  0        '#(##(#'0   CaliforniaConstitution,ArticleI,section15#>(#.8(#(##4,29,30,38  d 0   CaliforniaConstitution,ArticleI,section7#>(#.NN7(#(##4,29,30,38  d 0   CaliforniaConstitution,ArticleVI,section10#r!r!F(#.ZZ9(#(##2,22 d  0   UnitedStatesConstitution,FifthAmendment#>(#.((5(#(##4,29,30,38 d  0   UnitedStatesConstitution,FourteenthAmendment#>(#.00:(#(##4,29,30,38 d 0   UnitedStatesConstitution,SixthAmendment#>(#.LL5(#(##4,29,30,38 ;( 33dӈ d 0G(TION        3        ' #(##(#'Cases 33d x 3V, Z Z      W WV VU U  ULA  0        '#(##(#'0   Blumenthalv.UnitedStates(1947)332U.S.539#L"L"I(#.jj9(#(##36 x 0   Bravermanv.UnitedStates(1942)317U.S.49#L"L"I(#.7(#(##35 x 0   Chapmanv.California(1967)386U.S.18#A(#.3(#(##20,29,31 x 0   Deckv.Missouri(2005)__U.S__,125S.Ct.2007#5(#.``<(#(##19,21,22,23,29,31 x 0   Duckettv.Godinez(9thCir.1995)67F.3d734#L"L"I(#.8(#(##29 x! 0   Estellev.Williams(1976)425U.S.501#L"L"I(#.<<1(#(##23 x# 0   Holbrookv.Flynn(1986)475U.S.560#!!E(#.../(#(##23,38 x%  0   Illinoisv.Allen(1970)397U.S.337#!!E(#./(#(##23,__24 x'"" 0   InreHarris(1993)5Cal.4th813#!!E(#.+(#(##21,22  0   InreWinchester(1960)53Cal.2d528#L"L"I(#./(#(##21  0   Peoplev.Duran(1976)16Cal.3d282#tt=(#..(#(##25,26,27,29  0   Peoplev.Elliot(1978)77Cal.App.3d673#L"L"I(#.**3(#(##36   0   Peoplev.Fosselman(1983)33Cal.3d572#L"L"I(#.HH2(#(##31   0   Peoplev.Harrington(1871)42Cal.165#!!E(#.1(#(##24,26   0   Peoplev.Howard(1987)190Cal.App.3d41#L"L"I(#.3(#(##31   0   Peoplev.Ledesma(1987)43Cal.3d171#A(#.0(#(##30,31,33  0   Peoplev.Pope(1979)23Cal.3d412#,,9(#.XX-(#(##22,30,31,32,37  0   Peoplev.Seaton(2001)26Cal.4th598#L"L"I(#.0(#(##27  0   Peoplev.Tello(1997)15Cal.4th264#L"L"I(#./(#(##22  0   Peoplev.Vargas(2001)91Cal.App.4th506#L"L"I(#.4(#(##36  0   Rhodenv.Rowland(9thCir.1999)172F.3d633#L"L"I(#.((8(#(##29  0   Spainv.Rushen(9thCir.1989)883F.2d712#L"L"I(#.6(#(##29  0   Stricklandv.Washington(1984)466U.S.668#A(#.~~6(#(##21,30,31   0   UnitedStatesv.Howard(9thCir.2005)__F.3d__#!!E(#.<(#(##27,28 " 0   UnitedStatesv.OrozcoPravda(2dCir.1984)732F.2d1076#L"L"I(#.E(#(##36 - 33dӈ $  0-HIBI        3        ' #(##(#'_Statutes 33d_ 'd"" 3; Z Z      W WV VU U  V  0        '#(##(#'0   EvidenceCodesection452#""J(#. #(#(##2  0   EvidenceCodesection453#""J(#. #(#(##2  0   EvidenceCodesection459#""J(#. #(#(##2  0   Health&SafetyCodesection11352#""J(#.,,,(#(##2   0   PenalCodesection1118.1#:(#. #(#(##4,10,32,33,37   0   PenalCodesection1170.12#""J(#.66$(#(##3   0   PenalCodesection182#""J(#. (#(##2   0   PenalCodesection4500#L"L"I(#.$ $ !(#(##25  0   PenalCodesection4502#L"L"I(#.$ $ !(#(##25  0   PenalCodesection4573#""J(#.$ $ !(#(##3  0   PenalCodesection654#""J(#. (#(##3  0   PenalCodesection688#L"L"I(#. (#(##26 =ӈ  0=HIBI        _   WFX0HIBI        H.` hp x (##(#H@*  6" p x (#X6INTHECOURTOFAPPEALOFTHESTATEOFCALIFORNIAH.` hp x (#XH6" p x (#X6SIXTHAPPELLATEDISTRICT  H.` hp x (#XH0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#  h  `   INRETHEMATTEROF h     ) (#(#    `     h     )NO.__________0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#  h  `  JAIMEMEJIAJASSO, h     )(FiledinConjunction (#(#    `     h     )withappealin0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#  h  ` OnHabeasCorpus. h     )H028593) (#(#    `     h     )(MontereyCo.   `     h     )SuperiorCourt   `     h     )No.SS021615B)______________________________________)6" p x (#X6Q%0HIBI        & ,         H.` hp x (#XH  US??.,PETITIONFORWRITOFHABEASCORPUS Y =L 33,  K ZZ    ',K  WWVVUU      TOTHEHONORABLECONRADRUSHING,PRESIDINGJUSTICEOFTHECOURTOFAPPEAL,ANDTOTHEHONORABLEASSOCIATEJUSTICESOFTHECOURT: 33,                    Petitioner,JaimeMejiaJasso,byandthroughhisattorney,RuthMcVeigh,respectfullypetitionsthiscourtforawritofhabeascorpus,andbythisverifiedpetitionsets forththefollowingfactsandcausesfortheissuanceofsaid_writ: ", NN         &   @)I.            PetitionerispresentlyunlawfullyconfinedbytheDirectorofCorrectionsattheCaliforniaStatePrisoninDelano,California.OnMarch16,2005,incasenumberSS021615B,theMontereyCountySuperiorCourtunlawfullyimposeduponpetitionerasentenceof26yearstorunconsecutivelytoalifetermpetitionerwasthenserving.' PBNHP           &  II.M            Thispetitionisbeingfiledinthiscourtpursuanttoitsoriginalhabeascorpusjurisdiction.(Calif.Const.,Art.VI,sect.10 Z .)'bRrRR           III.Q  Atpresent,petitionersdirectappealispendingbeforethiscourtinH028593.Sincethispetitionpresentscollateralevidencethatisoutsidetherecordonappeal,itisnecessarytoproceedwiththeinstantpetitioninconjunctionwiththedirectappeal.Otherthanhispendingdirectappeal,thisisthesolelegalproceedinginwhichpetitionerischallenginghisconviction.S  IV.US            Inordertoavoidunnecessaryduplication,petitionerwillrelyontherecordonappeal,whichhasbeenfiledinhisattendantappeal.Accordingly,petitionerrespectfullyrequeststhatthiscourttakejudicialnoticeofthetranscripts,files,briefs,motions,andrecordsinH028593.(Evid.Codesects.452 \ ,subd.(d)(1),453 ^ ,&459 ` .) ($$ UU           &  V.V  OnOctober3,2002,thedistrictattorneyofMontereyCountyfiledanamendedinformationchargingpetitionerwiththefollowingoffenses:CountsI,III,andVallegedthatonoraboutJune2001,JuneJuly2001,andJuneAugust2001,respectively,petitionerconspiredtocommitinviolationofPenalCodesection182 b ,subdivision(a)thecrimesoftransportationforsaleofcontrolledsubstancesfromonecountytoanoncontiguouscountyinviolationofHealth&SafetyCodesection11352 d ,subdivision(b),andbringingdrugsintoastateprisoninviolationofPenalCodesection4573 f ;CountsIIandIVallegedthatonJuly15,2001andAugust18,2001,respectively,petitionertransportedforsaleacontrolledsubstancetoanoncontiguouscountyinviolationofHealth&SafetyCodesection11352 h ,subdivision(b).Theamendedinformationfurtherallegedthatpetitionerhadsufferedoneprior strikeconvictionwithinthemeaningofPenalCodesection1170.12 j ,subd.(c)(1).(ClerksTranscript[hereinafter CT]1829.XDbX0XDbXXXDb      m l   1     0XXDb)    OnMarch10,2005,afterabifurcatedfourdaytrial,ajuryconvictedpetitionerofallthesubstantivecharges.(CT6774.)OnMarch16,2005,thetrialcourtfoundtruethepriorstrikeconvictionallegation.(CT75;ReportersTranscript[hereinafter RT],Vol._V,_Ԁ10041005.) "   OnMarch16,2005,thetrialcourtsentencedpetitionerasfollows:astoCountII,thetrialcourtimposedtheuppertermofnineyears,whichitdoubledtoeighteenyearspursuanttoPenalCodesection1170.12 n ,subdivision(c)(1);astoCountI,onethirdthemiddletermofsixyears,i.e.,twoyears,whichitdoubledtofouryearspursuanttoPenalCodesection1170.12 n ,subdivision(c)(1)tobeservedconsecutivelytoCountII;astoCountIV,onethirdthemiddletermofsixyears,i.e.,twoyears,whichitdoubledtofouryearspursuanttoPenalCodesection1170.12 n ,subdivision(c)(1),tobeservedconsecutivelytoCountI;and,astoCountsIIIand_V,_ԀthetermswerestayedpursuanttoPenalCodesection654 o .Thus,thetrialcourtimposedatotalfixedtermof26years,andorderedpetitionertoservethetermconsecutivelytothelifetermhewaspresentlyserving.(CT7577;7980;RT,Vol._V,_Ԁ10041009.)  OnMarch16,2005,petitionerfiledatimelynoticeofappeal.(CT78.) Xo          & A VI.   Y            Atthetrialinthiscase,petitionerwasdeprivedofdueprocessoflaw,afairtrial,andtheeffectiveassistanceofcounselguaranteedtohimbytheFifth q ,Sixth s ,andFourteenth u AmendmentstotheUnitedStatesConstitutionandbyArticleI,sections7 w Ԁand15 y ԀoftheCaliforniaConstitution.PetitionerwasdeprivedofdueprocessoflawandafairtrialbythetrialcourtsunjustifiedandunsupportedforcingofpetitionertoappearthroughouthisjurytrialinawhiteDepartmentofCorrectionsjumpsuit,aswellasinvisiblehandandfeet ($$ shackles.Theineffectiveperformanceofdefensecounselwascommittedby:(1)hisfailuretorequestthatpetitionershandsandfeetbeunshackledduringhisjurytrialorthatpetitionershandsbeunshackledtopermithimtotakenotesduringhisjurytrialorthateffortsbemadetominimizethejurysperceptionofpetitionersshackles;(2)hisfailuretorequestthatpetitionerbedressedincivilianclothes,ratherthanaprisonjumpsuit,duringhisjurytrial;and(3)hisfailuretomakeaPenalCodesection1118.1 { Ԁmotionforjudgmentofacquittalastotwoofthethreeconspiracyallegationsortorequestthetrialcourtinstructthejurythatitwasaquestionoffactforthejurytodeterminepetitionersguiltorinnocenceastowhetherhecommittedoneoverallconspiracyortheallegedmultipleseparateconspiracies.'c d&    VII.jf  Withrespecttopetitionersclaimthathewasdenieddueprocessoflaw,thefactssupportingthisallegationareasfollows:'{j  1).Thetrialcourtforcedpetitionertoberestrainedthroughouthisjurytrial:petitionershandswerehandcuffedandlockedontoametal bellychainaroundthewaistofhiswhiteDepartmentofCorrectionsjumpsuit;hisankleswerelockedtometalcuffsthatwerelinkedtogetherbyametalchainapproximatelyfourteenincheslong.(Exhibits A& B.)  2.)Theshacklesmadenoisewhenpetitionermoved.Thejurycouldbothseeandhear ($$ petitionersshacklesthroughouthisjurytrial.(Exhibits A& B.) x     3.)Thereisnoreferenceintherecordonappealtopetitionerwearingaprisonjumpsuitandonlyonereferencetopetitionersshackling.Duringthereadingofjuryinstructions,thetrialcourtinstructedthejuryasfollows: Now,IcantellyouthatastheDepartmentofCorrectionspolicy,everyonewhoistransportedtocourtistransportedinrestraints.Thatappliestoeverybodyandithasabsolutelynothingtodowithwhetherthedefendantisguiltyornotguilty,anditshouldnotbeconsideredatallonthatquestion.(CT86;RT580.)Thetrialcourtmadenofindingsoffactspecifictopetitionernorprovidedanyfurtherexplanationstojustifyitsimpositionofshacklesuponpetitionerthroughouthisjurytrial.  4.)Atthetimeofthetrialofthiscase,itwasamatterofroutinecourtpolicyintheMontereyCountySuperiorCourttoshackleCaliforniaDepartmentofCorrectionsinmateswhoappearedincourt,whetherforroutinecourtappearancesorforjurytrial.(Exhibit B.)  5.)Petitionerwasnotinvolvedinanyviolentincidents,normadeanythreatsofviolence,priortohisjurytrialthatwouldhavejustifiedtheimpositionofhandandfeetrestraintsuponhim.Petitionermadenoattemptstoescapebeforeorduringhisjurytrial.Petitionerwasnotdisruptiveduringanyofhispretrialcourtappearancesorduringhisjurytrial.(Exhibits A& B.)  6.)Thefeetshacklesmadeitdifficultforpetitionertowalkandwerenoisy.Petitioner ($$ wasescortedintothecourtroomthroughitsfrontdoorsandhadtowalkpastthejurorsastheyassembledoutsidethecourtroomsdoorsinthehallway.Petitioneralsousedthepublicrestroominthishallway.Hewasescortedintotherestroomwearingtheshackleswhilesomejurorsfromhistrialwerepresentintherestroom.Petitionerfounditveryembarrassingtobeseenandheardwearingshacklesinfrontofthejury.(Exhibit A.)  7.)Petitionerwasshackledforsolongeachday,andforcedtowalkintheshacklesfromtheprisonerholdingareathroughthecourthouseparkinglottothecourtroomandback,thathisanklesbecameinjuredbytheshackles,whichinjuriesbled.WhileinMontereyCountyforhisjurytrial,petitionerwashousedattheSalinasValleyStatePrison.Hewastreatedintheprisoninfirmaryfortheinjuriestohisanklescausedbythemetalcuffs.(Exhibit A.)co          8.)Petitionerdidnotknowthathecouldasktotakenotesduringhisjurytrialandthereforedidnotaskhistrialcounselorthetrialcourttohavehishandsunshackledsohecouldparticipateinhisdefenseinthatway.(Exhibits A& B.)            9.)Petitionerwasworriedthroughouthisjurytrialbecausehewasfacingveryseriousfelonychargesandthought whatchancedidIhavewiththejurywhenIwaswearingall thoseshacklesandaprisonjumpsuit.(Exhibit A.) $  jxo          &   VIII.m  Withrespecttoallegation(1)regardingtrialcounselsineffectiveness,petitionerdidnotwanttoberestrainedathisjurytrialandaskedhistrialcounselifhecouldbeunshackledduringthetrial.Baseduponpetitionersproperbehaviorduringpreviouscourtappearances,trialcounselwasunawareofanyreasonspecifictopetitionerthatwouldhavejustifiedthetrialcourtforcingpetitionertowearshacklesathisjurytrial.Nevertheless,trialcounseltoldpetitioneritwas routineinprisoncasesthatallprisonersbeshackledduringtheirtrials forsecurityreasons.Trialcounselalsotoldpetitionerthatevenifheweretoaskthejudgetounshacklehim,thejudgewouldnotdoit.Petitionerdidnotdiscussremovaloftheshackleswithanyotherpersonbecause,fromwhathistrialcounseltoldhim,hebelievedhewasrequiredtowearshacklestoallcourtproceedings.(Exhibits A& B.) 'z    Trialcounselhasdeclaredthathehadnotacticalreasonsforfailingtorequestpetitionerbeunshackledathisjurytrial.(Exhibit B.)z  X.y            Withfurtherrespecttoallegation(1)regardingtrialcounselsineffectiveness,trialcounseldidnotaskpetitionerifhewantedtotakenotesduringhisjurytrial,nordidpetitionerknowitwaspossibleforanaccusedtotakenotesduringhistrial.Asaresult,petitionerdidnotrequesttohavehishandsunshackledforthispurpose,nordidtrialcounselrequestthetrialcourttoorderpetitionershands!orevenonehand!beunshackledforthis ($$ purpose.Hadpetitionerknownofthepossibilityoftakingnotesduringhisfelonyjurytrial,hewouldhaveaskedhistrialcounseltomaketherequestonhisbehalf.(Exhibits A& B.)  Theimpositionofthehandshacklesadverselyimpactedpetitionersabilitytocommunicatewithhistrialcounselandtoparticipateinhisowndefense.Aspetitionerstatedinhisdeclaration, ItsdifficulttoremembereverythingallthewitnessessayandIwouldhavelikedtotakenotessoIcouldrememberthingsIwantedtoaskmylawyerabout.(Exhibit A.)  Trialcounselhasdeclaredthathehadnotacticalreasonsforfailingtorequestthatpetitionerhavehishandsunshackledtopermithimtotakenotesathisjurytrial.(Exhibit B.)o          &  X.            Withfurtherrespecttoallegation(1)regardingtrialcounselsineffectiveness,thejurycouldseepetitionersshackles,andcouldhearthemwhenpetitionermoved.Trialcounseldidnotrequestthetrialcourtmakeanyeffortstominimizethejurysperceptionofpetitionersshackles.(Exhibits A& B.)' T  Trialcounselhasdeclaredthathehadnotacticalreasonsforfailingtorequestthetrialcourtmakeeffortstominimizethejurorsperceptionofpetitionersshackles.(Exhibit B.) ($$ co        &  XI.    Withrespecttoallegation(2)regardingtrialcounselsineffectiveness,petitionerwasrequiredtowearawhiteprisonjumpsuitthroughouthisjurytrial.ThejumpsuithadletteringonitidentifyingpetitionerasaprisonerintheCaliforniaDepartmentofCorrections.Petitionerdidnotwanttowearaprisonjumpsuitathisjurytrialandaskedhistrialcounselifhecouldwearcivilianclothes.Histrialcounseltoldhimtherewasnopointinwearingcivilianclothesbecausethejurywouldknowbythechargesagainsthimthathewasaprisoninmate.(Exhibits A& B.)'L  Trialcounselhasdeclaredthathehadnotacticalreasonsforfailingtorequestthatpetitionerbepermittedtowearcivilianclothesathisjurytrial.(Exhibit B.)  XII.            Withrespecttoallegation(3)regardingtrialcounselsineffectiveness,theprosecutionallegedthreeseparateconspiracychargesagainstpetitioner,accusinghimofconspiringtosmugglecontrolledsubstancesintothestateprisonwherehewasincarcerated.Thejuryconvictedpetitionerofallthreeconspiracyallegations.Atsentencing,trialcounselarguedthattheevidenceshowedonlyoneoverallconspiracy,ratherthanthreeseparateones,andrequestedthereforethatthetrialcourtnotusethefactofthemultipleconspiracyconvictionstoimposeconsecutivesentences.Thetrialcourtdeniedtrialcounselsrequestandfoundthemultipleconspiracyconvictionswerefactorsinaggravationwarranting ($$ consecutivesentences,whichitthenimposed.(Vol._V,_ԀRT10041009.)  Attrial,trialcounselfailedtomakeaPenalCodesection1118.1 } Ԁmotionforjudgmentofacquittalontwoofthethreeconspiracyallegations.Thereafter,trialcounselfailedtorequestthetrialcourtinstructthejurythatitwasaquestionoffactforthejurytodeterminewhetherpetitionerwasguiltyornotguiltyofasingleoverallconspiracyorofmultipleseparateconspiracies.  Trialcounselhasdeclaredthathehadnotacticalreasonsforfailingtomakethemotionforjudgmentforacquittalandfornotrequestingthespecialjuryinstruction.(Exhibit B.)    ial,          &  XIII.            Therecordonappealisnotadequatetopresenttheseclaimsbecauseitcontainsnodirectinformationexplainingwhypetitionerappearedathisjurytrialinshacklesandaprisonuniform,ortrialcounselsdirectadmissionsthathehadnotacticalreasonsforhisfailurestomakevariousrequests.Asaresultofthelackofanyfurtherevidenceintheappellaterecordontheseissues,anappealdoesnotprovidepetitionerwithaplain,adequate,orspeedyremedy,andapetitionforawritofhabeascorpusisnecessaryinordertopresent factsnotofrecordintherelatedappeal.'A $  Sial,        &   XIV.    Petitionerhasnoplain,speedy,oradequateremedyotherthanbythispetition.'s  WHEREFORE,petitionerrespectfullyrequeststhatthisCourt:  (1)IssueanorderconsolidatingthispetitionwiththerelatedappealinH028593;  (2)takejudicialnoticeofthetranscripts,files,briefs,motions,andrecordsinH028593;  (3)issueanordertoshowcausetotheDirectorofCorrectionstoinquireintothelegalityofpetitionersconfinement;  (4)issueanorderforthetakingofsuchevidenceasmaybenecessaryfortheproperconsiderationofthepetition;  (5)issuethewritandvacatepetitionersjudgmentofconviction;and0  (6)grantpetitionerwhateveralternativeorfurtherreliefasmaybeappropriate (#(# intheinterestsofjustice.Dated:   `     h     Respectfullysubmitted,   `     h        `     h     ____________________________ $     `     h     RUTH_MCVEIGH_   `     h     AttorneyforPetitioner,   `     h     JAIME_MEJIA_Ԁ_JASSO_  '##   & ,          VERIFICATION  { 33,  _*toaWWWW    ',:  WWVVUU  _           33X33,  I,Ruth_McVeigh_,declare: 33X  IamanattorneyadmittedtopracticebeforethecourtsoftheStateofCalifornia.Iamtheattorneyforpetitionerandamauthorizedtofilethispetition.PetitionerisunabletomaketheverificationbecauseheisincarceratedinKernCounty,andforthatreasonImakethisverificationonpetitioner'sbehalf.Allfactsallegedintheabovepetitionorelsewhereinthisdocument,nototherwisesupportedbycitationstotherecordonappealortheexhibitssubmittedtothiscourt,aretrueofmyownpersonalknowledge.  IdeclareunderpenaltyofperjurythattheforegoingistrueandcorrectunderthelawsoftheStateofCaliforniaandwasexecutedonJanuary12,2006 .  , ial,           `     h     Respectfullysubmitted,   `     h     _______________________ 4    `     h     RUTH_MCVEIGH_  4   & X          POINTSANDAUTHORITIESINSUPPORTOFPETITIONFOR  WRITOFHABEASCORPUS   33,  STATEMENTOFFACTS  D , _UtoaWWWW    'Xe  WWVVUU  _H 33X33,  Thispetitionarisesfrompetitioners_reconvictions_X-XX-XXX-      IX33X_ l   2     _XX- 33XIXӀofthreecountsofconspiringto  X smuggleheroin,cocaine,andmarijuanaintoaprisonduringthesummerof2001andtwocountsoftransportingthosecontrolledsubstancesacrosscountylines.Duringthattimeperiod,petitionerwasincarceratedatSoledadStatePrison[hereinafter _CTF_].Theevidenceshowedthat_CTF_Ԁprisonguardsmonitoredinmatetelephonecallsduringwhichpetitionerandotherinmatesmadearrangementswithpersonsoutsidetheprisontohavethreewomensmuggledrugsintotheprisonwhilevisitingtheirhusbandinmates.ThesewomenwerenamedMaryRamirez,Sarah_Baucom_,andMarthaSilva. 33X  OfficerDavid_Doglietto_,acorrectionalofficerassignedtotheNarcoticsandCrimeSceneInvestigativeUnitat_CTF_,testifiedthatprisonguardsmonitoredpetitionerandinmatesDannyRamirez,Francisco PanchoVilla,andStorm_Baucom_Ԁastheymadecollectcallsfromabankoftelephonesinexerciseyardsattheprison.(Vol.I,RT19.)Acomputermaintainedrecordingsofallthetelephonecalls.(Vol.I,RT23.)  Duringthesummerof2001,Officer_Doglietto_Ԁtrackedtelephonecallspetitionerand %X  DannyRamirezmadetoaparticulartelephonenumber:(805)4878969.(Vol.II,RT265266.)TheofficerdeterminedthatthenumberbelongedtoRuben_Ambriz_Ԁ[hereinafter Ruben],wholivedinOxnardinVenturaCounty.(Vol.II,RT258;265.)InOfficer_Doglietto_sopinion,petitionerandRubenhadan agreementtohave anongoingbusinessforthemofsmugglingdrugsintoSoledadStatePrison.(Vol.II,RT295.)TheproceduretheywouldfollowisthatpetitionerwouldtelephoneRuben!thecontactpersonoutsidethe   prison!togivehimthenamesandtelephonenumbersofotherinmateswives;Ruben   wouldfollowpetitionersorderstosupplythewiveswithspecifiedamountsofpackagedcontrolledsubstances;thewiveswouldthensmugglethedrugsintotheprisonwhilevisitingtheirhusbands.(Vol.II,RT294297;348.)Tokeepthe businessrunningsmoothly,petitionerwouldhaveinmatesordersfordrugpurchasessetupaheadofthedrugdeliveriestotheprison.(Vol.II,RT294295)Postofficeboxeswerealsoestablishedoutsidetheprisonforprisonerstosendtheircheckstoinpaymentofthedrugs.(Vol.II,RT262263.)  PetitionersfirstrecordedtelephonecalltoRubenwasonJune5,2001.(Vol.II,RT348.)Duringthiscall,petitionerinstructedRubentocall Saraat(805)9683335.(Vol.II,RT269.)Officer_Doglietto_ԀconfirmedthephonenumberbelongedtoSara_Baucom_,andthatshewasmarriedtoandauthorizedtovisitinmateStorm_Baucom_.(Vol.II,RT280.)  InOfficer_Doglietto_sopinion,petitionertoldRubentoacquiredrugs,deliverthemtoSarain_Goleta_,andthatSarawouldthenbringthedrugsintotheprisonduringavisitto ($$ herhusband,Storm_Baucom_.(Vol.II,RT279280.)Petitionersaid, [_T]ell_ԀherthatyouregoingtotakesomethingforStorm.(Vol.II,RT270.)  Officer_Doglietto_ԀtestifiedthatpetitioneralsosaidtoRubenduringthiscall: Okay.Thisisthefirst!becausethefirsttimeisalittlehardbecauseweregoinghereandthere,   butfromnowon,youknow,everythingwillbebetter8Ifthisthinggoeswell,wellknow   thatwecancountonyou.(Vol.II,RT275;278.)Whentheprosecutionaskedtheofficerwhat,inhisopinion,petitionerwasreferringto,theofficeranswered, Itmeansthattheyrevery!verynewtothis,andwith,brackets,Theyllgetmuchbetter.(Vol.II,RT275.)  PetitionerthentoldRuben, Okay,andtomorrowIlltellyouwheretheothersaregoingto.(Vol.II,RT275.)  Thenextday,June6,2001,petitionertelephonedRuben.HetoldRuben, Look,Imgoingtogiveyousomemorenames.(Vol.II,RT343344.)HethenprovidedRubenwiththenamesofMaryRamirezandTheresa(alsoknownasMarthaSilva),andtheirtelephonenumbers.(Vol.II,RT344345.)ThesewomenwerethewivesofSoledadPrisoninmatesDannyRamirezandFranciscoVilla.(Vol.II,RT344.)PetitionerinstructedRubentosupplyMaryandTheresawithdrugs.(Vol.II,RT345.)ReferringtoMaryRamirez,petitionertoldRuben, [_Y]ou_ԀtellheryouhaveapackageforDanny.(Vol.II,RT345.)(DannyRamirezwaspetitioners_cellmate_ԀbeforepetitionerwastransferredtotheAdministrativeSegregationUnit.(RT356.))Referringto Theresa,petitionertoldRubenshewastobesuppliedwith ($$ drugs [_i]n_ԀregardstoPancho[FranciscoVilla].(Vol.II,RT345;347.)  InthissameJune6,2001telephonecall,petitionergaveRubendetailedinstructionsonhowtodivideupthedrugs,whatamountstogivetoMaryandwhatamountstoTheresa,andhowtopackagethedrugsforconcealment.(Vol.II,RT346348.)AfterpetitionergaveRubentheseinstructions,hetoldhim, ThatswhatIwant,becauselikethateverythingisfine.Thatwayforthenexttime,Ijusttellyou,youknowwhat,thesamewayasthelasttime,addressandallthatsavetime.(Vol.II,RT348.)  OnJune27,2001,petitionercalledRubenandtoldhimthatSara iswaitingforthekids.(Vol.II,RT289290.)Rubensaidhewasgoingto todropoffthekids,thetoysforthekids.(Vol.II,RT297.)PetitionerrepliedthatRubenshould takethemtoherwrappedup.(Vol.II,RT297.)Officer_Doglietto_Ԁsaidtheywerenottalkingaboutchildren,butratheraboutcontrolledsubstancesandwrappingtheminlatexorrubberforconcealment.(Vol.II,RT291;297.)  Inregardtothissametelephoneconversation,Officer_Doglietto_Ԁfurthertestified, [PetitionerthensaidtoRuben,]Thisissomethingthatdoesntstop,right?AndRubensays,No,youknowthat.And[petitioner]says,Thereyougo,buddy.ThatswhatIwant,becauseyouknowwhatItoldyou:Ihavealotofguyshereandtheytellmewhen,whenItellthemcalmdown,andhelaughs.Itoldthem,IthinkthisandIthinkthat,anditsreallygoodthatyougavemethatnews,buddy. ($$   DistrictAttorney: Whichnews?  Officer_Doglietto_: HeshappythatRubenisinagreement,theyregoingtokeepdoingthis;itsgoingtobeanongoingbusinessforthem.(Vol.II,RT295296.)  Basedupontheseandothermonitoredtelephoneconversations,Officer_Doglietto_preparedasearchwarrantforSara.(Vol.II,RT327.)OnJuly15,2001,SaraappearedattheprisonandsignedintovisitStorm.(Vol.II,RT328.)Duringastripsearch,Sarawasuncooperative.(Vol.II,RT335337.)Prisonauthoritiestookhertoahospitalwhereadoctorretrievedapackageofbindlesfromhervaginalcanal.(Vol.II,RT337341.)Thepartiesstipulatedthatthevariousbindlescontained7.47gramsofmarijuana,49.97gramsofblacktarheroin,and.92gramsofcocaine.(Vol.II,RT342.)  Onthissameday,prisonofficialstransferredpetitionertothe AdministrativeSegregationUnittoisolatehimfromthegeneralprisonpopulation.(Vol.II,RT331.)Thisareaislike aprisonwithinaprisonbecauseitismuchmorerestrictivethanotherhousingareasattheprison:aninmatesmovementsarecurtailed,hehasnoaccesstotelephones,hemayonlyreceivevisitorswhenseparatedbyaglasspartition,andrarelyispermittedtointeractwiththegeneralprisonpopulation.(Vol.II,RT332.)  Afterpetitionerstransfer,hisformerroommate,DannyRamirez!whoidentified $  himselftoRubenas Morelia!tookovermakingthetelephonecallstoRubenfor &"" petitioner.(Vol.II,RT364.)Officer_Doglietto_Ԁagreedwiththeprosecutionwhensheasked ($$ him, Soifsomebodyinthatfacilitywantstocontinueanongoingbusiness,wouldtheyneedtohavesomeoneelsewithaccesstophonesdothatforthem?Hereplied, Yes,thatiscorrect.(Vol.II,RT357.)  OnJuly20,2001, MoreliatelephonedRubenonpetitionersbehalftoreassurehimhewasnotbeingheldresponsibleforpetitionerssegregation. MoreliatoldRuben,referringtopetitioner, HetoldmetellRubennottobeonthelookout,thatlittlecarthathehasisrunningfine.(Vol.II,RT368.)Officer_Doglietto_Ԁtestifiedthatbaseduponhistrainingandexperience, WhattheyretellingRubenisthateverythingisfine,yourenotundersuspicion,dontworry,youregoingtobeokay.Thelittlecarisrunningfine8This  isinmateRamirezconfirmingthateverythingisgoingtobefine,Rubenisnotasuspect,thereisnothingtofear.Hessayinghe[ Morelia]was!hewasgroomedtotakeoveras  soonas!ifsomethingeverhappened;hesbeenreceivingmessagesfrom[petitioner]and  relayingthemto!toRubenthattheywillcontinuewhattheyweredoingbefore,that  everythingwillbefine.(Vol.II,RT368;370371.)  Baseduponhisinvestigation,Officer_Doglietto_ԀpreparedasearchwarrantforMary.(Vol.II,RT350.)ShecametotheprisononJune23,2001andsignedintovisitDanny.(Vol.II,RT350.)Duringastripsearch,officersfoundabindleconcealedinMarysbrassiere.(Vol.II,RT351.)Thepartiesstipulatedthebindlecontained24.57gramsofblacktarheroin.(Vol.II,RT352.) ($$   OnAugust9,2001, MoreliacalledRuben.(Vol.II,RT371.) Moreliasaid, So,yes,homeboy,Illtellyou,theguysareconcernedandarewaitingforTheresa.Rubenreplied, Illspeakwithherand[see]ifshescoming.(Vol.II,RT377.)Officer_Doglietto_stated, [_T]heyre_ԀmakingsurethatRubenisincontactwithTheresa,whoisMarthaSilva.(Vol.II,RT377.)  Officer_Doglietto_Ԁmonitoredseveralmoretelephonecallsbetween MoreliaandRuben,andbaseduponthosecallspreparedasearchwarrantforMarthaSilva.(Vol.II,RT384385;387388;391.)OnAugust18,2001,Marthaarrivedattheprison.(Vol.II,RT391.)Shesignedintomeetherhusband,FranciscoVilla.(Vol.II,RT392.)Duringastripsearch,Marthawasuncooperative.(Vol.III,RT538539.)Prisonauthoritiestookhertoahospitalwhereadoctorretrievedapackageofbindlesfromhervaginalcanal.(Vol.III,RT539541.)Thepartiesstipulatedthatthevariousbindlescontained8gramsofmarijuanaand45gramsofblacktarheroin.(Vol.III,RT542.),20          & ,         ARGUMENT 33,  _d W W    ',  W WV VU U  _& ,         INTRODUCTION    , _ d WW    ',   WWVVUU  _           33X33,__  Throughouthisjurytrial,petitionerwasforcedtohavehishandshandcuffedandsecuredtoametal bellychainwrappedaroundthewaistofhiswhiteCaliforniaDepartmentofCorrectionsjumpsuit,andtohavehisanklesshackledtoametalchainabout 'X"" fourteenincheslongbetweenhisfeet.Thejurycouldseepetitionersshacklesandcouldhearthenoisetheymadewhenpetitionermoved.Thetrialcourtmadenoefforts!andtrial  counselmadenorequests!tolessenthejurorsperceptionoftheshackles.Thesole  referenceintherecordtopetitionerbeingshackledisaconcludinginstructionthetrialcourtgavetothejury: Now,IcantellyouthatastheDepartmentofCorrectionspolicy,everyonewhoistransportedtocourtistransportedinrestraints.Thatappliestoeverybodyandithasabsolutelynothingtodowithwhetherthedefendantisguiltyornotguilty,anditshouldnotbeconsideredatallonthatquestion.(CT86;RT580.) 33X  InDeckv.Missouri(2005)___U.S_Ԁ__,125S.Ct.2007_  _,theUnitedStatesSupreme  Courtmadeitemphaticallyclearthatthepracticeofvisiblyshacklingacriminallyaccusedathisjurytrialwithoutjustificationviolatestheaccusedsconstitutionalrighttodueprocessoflaw: [_T]he_ԀFifthandFourteenthAmendmentsprohibittheuseofphysicalrestraintsvisibletothejuryabsentatrialcourtdetermination,intheexerciseofitsdiscretion,thattheyarejustifiedbyastateinterestspecifictoaparticulartrial.(Id.,125S.Ct.atp.2012.)   Shackling,thecourtstated, isinherentlyprejudicial8Thus,whereacourt,without   adequatejustification,ordersthedefendanttowearshacklesthatwillbeseenbythejury,thedefendantneednotdemonstrateactualprejudicetomakeoutadueprocessviolation.TheStatemustprovebeyondareasonabledoubtthatthe[shackling]errorcomplainedofdidnotcontributetotheverdictobtained.(Chapmanv.California,386U.S.18  ,24(1967).) ($$ (Id.,125S.Ct.atp.2015.)    OtherthanthetrialcourtsinstructiontothejuryregardingtheDepartmentofCorrectionsspolicyoftransportingprisoninmatesinrestraints,therecordinthiscaseissilentinregardtopetitionersshackling:theprosecutionpresentednoevidenceontheissuenorrequestedthatpetitionerbeshackled;thetrialcourtmadenofindingsoffactspecifictopetitionerinsupportofitsdecisiontoshacklehim,suchaspastviolentorthreateningbehaviororattemptstoescape,oranydisruptiveorinappropriatebehaviorbypetitionerduringtrial;and,finally,trialcounselmadenoinliminemotionstorequestthatpetitioner  bepermittedtodressincivilianclothes,thatpetitionersfeetandhandsbeunshackledorthatoneorbothofhishandsbeunshackledsothathecouldtakenotesduringhistrialorthateffortsbemadetominimizethejurysperceptionofhisshackles.  Intheanalysisbelow,petitionerwillestablishthathewasdenieddueprocessoflaw,afairtrial,andtheeffectiveassistanceofcounselbythetrialcourtsabdicationofitsdutytopreserve thedignityanddecorum8necessaryfortheconductofjudicialproceedings  thatdetermineissuesoflibertyandlife(UnitedStatesv.Howard(2005)429F.3d843,   851)andbecause trial counsel'sconductsounderminedtheproperfunctioningofthe " adversarialprocessthatthetrialcannotbereliedonashavingproducedajustresult(Stricklandv.Washington(1984)466U.S.668  ,686).Petitionernowhastenstodemonstrate &"" hisentitlementtoaremedy.  ($$ :,20        & ,         I.  THEFILINGOFTHISPETITIONALONGWITHAREQUESTTHATITBECONSOLIDATEDWITHPETITIONERSPENDINGDIRECTAPPEALISTHE  APPROPRIATEPROCEDURE.   33,  _intsWW    ',  WWVVUU  _           33X33,  Petitionerisfilingthispetitioninthefirstinstanceinthiscourtbecausehisdirectappeal,H028593,ispendingbeforethiscourt.Inemployingthisprocedure,petitionerhassoughttocomplywiththeprinciplesenunciatedbytheCaliforniaSupremeCourt. 33X  First,inregardtopetitionersdueprocessclaim,hedidnotraisetheclaiminhisdirectappealbecausethepresentrecordonappealisincompleteonthisissue.However,thetrialcourtsunjustifiableforcingofpetitionertoappearthroughouthisjurytrialinvisibleshacklesdeniedhimafairandimpartialtrialamountingtoadenialofdueprocessoflaw.(Deckv.Missouri(2005)__U.S.__,125S.Ct.2007_  _.)The defectsofatallyinfectedthe , regularityofthetrialandconvictionastoviolatethefundamentalaspectsoffairnessandresultinamiscarriageofjustice.(InreWinchester(1960)53Cal.2d528  ,531532.)Thus, , habeascorpusistheproperremedytocollaterallyattackpetitionersjudgmentofconvictionobtainedinviolationofhisfundamentalconstitutionalrighttodueprocessoflaw.(Inre  , Harris(1993)5Cal.4th813  ,826.) ",   Second,inPeoplev.Pope(1979)23Cal.3d412  ,thecourtdiscussedtheappropriate $,  legalmechanismforraisinganissueofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Inrelevantpart, &,"" thecourtheldthatjudicialeconomyisbestservedifapetitionforhabeascorpusisjoinedwithadirectappeal.(Id.  ,atpp.426427,fn.17;accordPeoplev.Tello(1997)15Cal.4th  264  ,266267.)  PetitionerrespectfullyrequeststhiscourttoexerciseitsoriginalhabeascorpusjurisdictionpursuanttoArticleVI,section10oftheCaliforniaConstitution  .Inthisway,judicialeconomywillbeservedbythesimultaneousresolutionofboththispetitionandtherelatedappeal.(Peoplev.Pope,supra,23Cal.3d412  ,426427,fn.17;InreHarris(1993)   5Cal.4th813  ,826.)  ,20        & ,         II.  THETRIALCOURTSUNWARRANTEDIMPOSITIONOFVISIBLEHANDAND  FEETSHACKLESUPONPETITIONERTHROUGHOUTHISJURYTRIALDENIEDPETITIONERHISFIFTHANDFOURTEENTHAMENDMENTRIGHTSTODUEPROCESSOFLAWANDHISSIXTHAMENDMENTRIGHTTOTHEEFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL.  Ԁ 33,  _intsWW    ',   WWVVUU  _           33X33,  IntherecentdecisionofDeckv.Missouri(2005)__U.S.__,125S.Ct.2007_  _,the , UnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthattheConstitutionforbidstheuseofvisibleshacklesduringacapitaltrialspenaltyphaseunlessthatuseis justifiedbyanessentialstateinterest!suchascourtroomsecurity!specifictothedefendantontrial.InDeck,supra, ", defendanthadbeenconvictedofcapitalmurderandsentencedtodeath.TheMissouriSupremeCourtsetasidethedeathsentence.Athisnewsentencingtrial,overhisobjections, &,"" defendantwasshackledwithlegirons,handcuffs,andabellychain.Inregardtoitsreasonsforimposingrestraintsondefendant,thetrialcourtstatedonlythatdefendants beingshackledtakesanyfearoutof[thejurors]minds.(Id.  ,atp.2015.) 33X    Inreachingitsholding,thecourtfirstconsideredwhether,ingeneral,theConstitutionpermitsaStatetousevisibleshacklesroutinelyintheguiltphaseofacriminaltrial.Itstated, Theanswerisclear:thelawhaslongforbiddenroutineuseofvisibleshacklesduringtheguiltphase;itpermitsaStatetoshackleacriminaldefendantonlyinthepresenceofaspecialneed.(Id.  ,atp.2010.)    Thecourtreviewedpriorholdingsthatrecognized,inthecontextofcriminaltrials,that certainpracticesposesuchathreattothefairnessofthe_factfinding_Ԁprocessthattheymustbesubjectedtoclosejudicialscrutiny.(Holbrookv.Flynn(1986)475U.S.560  ,  568.)InEstellev.Williams(1976)425U.S.501  ,forexample,thecourtcondemnedthe  practiceofforcinganaccusedtogototrialinprisonclothing becauseofthepossibleimpairmentofthepresumptionsobasictotheadversarysystem.(Estellev.Williams,supra,  425U.S.  Ԁatp.504.)     InIllinoisv.Allen(1970)397U.S.337  ,thecourtconsideredthepracticeofremoving " adisruptiveorviolentdefendantfromhisjurytrial.Thecourtobservedthatanalternativetoremovingsucha contumaciousdefendantfromthecourtroom,inordertopreservehisSixthAmendmentrightofconfrontation,wouldbetobindandgaghim.Inregardtothe ($$  bindingandgaggingoption,however,thecourtleftnodoubtofitsrepugnanceofthepractice:abli        &            0  0` (#(# Tryingadefendantforacrimewhilehesitsboundandgaggedbeforethejudgeandjurywould,toanextent,complywiththatpartoftheSixthAmendmentspurposesthataccordsthedefendantanopportunitytoconfrontthewitnessesatthetrial.Buteventocontemplatesuchatechnique,muchlessseeit,arousesafeelingthatnopersonshouldbetriedwhileshackledandgaggedexceptasalastresort.Notonlyisitpossiblethatthesightofshacklesandgagsmighthaveasignificanteffectonthejurysfeelingsaboutthedefendant,buttheuseofthistechniqueisitselfsomethingofanaffronttotheverydignityanddecorumofjudicialproceedingsthatthejudgeisseekingtouphold.Moreover,oneofthedefendantsprimaryadvantagesofbeingpresentatthetrial,hisabilitytocommunicatewithhiscounsel,isgreatlyreducedwhenthedefendantisinaconditionoftotalphysicalrestraint.(Id.,  at  Ԁp.344.)'  ` (#` (# abli                     InDeck,supra,afterreviewingthehistorical judicialhostilitytoshackling,the x courtemphasizedtheimportanceofgivingeffecttothreefundamentalprinciples.   First,theAmericanjudicialsystempresumesanaccusedisinnocentuntilprovenguilty. Visibleshacklingunderminesthepresumptionofinnocenceandtherelatedfairnessofthe_factfinding_Ԁprocess.Itsuggeststothejurythatthejusticesystemitselfseesaneedtoseparateadefendantfromthecommunityatlarge.(Deckv.Missouri,supra,125S.Ct. x  atp.2013.)  x"   Second,shacklingcanimpingeuponanaccusedsSixthAmendmentrighttotheeffectiverepresentationofcounsel. Shacklescaninterferewiththeaccusedsabilitytocommunicatewithhislawyer.QuotingfromtheCaliforniaSupremeCourtsonehundred x(#$ thirtyfiveyearoldopinionofPeoplev.Harrington(1871)42Cal.165  ,168,thecourt  acknowledgedthat shackles_impos[e_]physicalburdens,pains,andrestraints8,_ten[d_]to  confuseandembarrassdefendantsmentalfaculties,andtherebytendtomateriallyabridgeandprejudiciallyaffecthisconstitutionalrights.(Deckv.Missouri,supra,125   S.Ct.atp.2013.)      Thirdistheconcernthatthepracticeofshacklinganaccusedunderminesthe dignityanddecorumofjudicialproceedings8Thecourtroomsformaldignity,which   includestherespectfultreatmentofdefendants,reflectstheimportanceofthematteratissue,guiltorinnocence,andthegravitywithwhichAmericansconsideranydeprivationofanindividualslibertythroughcriminalpunishment.Anditreflectsaseriousnessofpurposethathelpstoexplainthejudicialsystemspowertoinspiretheconfidenceandtoaffectthebehaviorofageneralpublicwhosedemandsforjusticeourcourtsseektoserve.Theroutineuseofshacklesinthepresenceofjurieswouldunderminethesesymbolicyetconcreteobjectives.(Ibid.)    Californialawhaslongbeeninaccordwiththeseprinciples.InPeoplev.Duran   (1976)16Cal.3d282  ,defendantwasaCaliforniaDepartmentofCorrectionsinmate,havingbeenpreviouslyconvictedofrobbery,andwaspresentlybeingprosecutedforassaultwithadeadlyweaponbyalifetermprisoner(Pen.Code,4500  )andpossessionofadirkordaggerwhileconfinedinstateprison(Pen.Code,4502  ).Defensecounselmadeamotion ($$ priortotrialthatdefendantandhisinmatewitnessesbeallowedtoappearbeforethejuryincivilianclothesandwithoutfeetandhandshackles.Themotionwassummarilydenied.Counselthenaskedifdefendantcouldhaveonehandfreedinordertotakenotesduringthetrial.Thisrequestwasgrantedbutthecourtstatedthatdefendantswristsandankleswouldbeshackledwhenhetestified.  Initsanalysis,thecourtreviewedcommonlawpronouncementsagainstunjustifiedshacklingofacriminallyaccused,aswellasPenalCodesection688  ,whichreads, Nopersonchargedwithapublicoffensemaybesubjected,beforeconviction,toanymorerestraintthanisnecessaryforhisdetentiontoanswerthecharge.ThecourtreaffirmeditsholdinginPeoplev.Harrington  ,supra,stating,   abli        &            0  0` (#(# Webelievethatpossibleprejudiceinthemindsofthejurors,theaffronttohumandignity,thedisrespectfortheentirejudicialsystemwhichisincidenttounjustifiableuseofphysicalrestraints,aswellastheeffectsuchrestraintshaveuponadefendantsdecisiontotakethestand,allsupportourcontinuedadherencetotheHarringtonrule8thatadefendantcannotbe  subjectedtophysicalrestraintsofanykindinthecourtroomwhileinthejuryspresence,unlessthereisashowingofamanifestneedforsuchrestraints.(Peoplev.Duran  ,supra,16Cal.3datpp.290291.)'h ` (#` (# Xabli             Thecourtheldthatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninorderingdefendanttobevisiblyshackledwithoutanyshowingthatdefendantthreatenedtoescapeortobehaveviolently,eitherbeforecomingtocourtorduringhisjurytrial. Thefactthatdefendantwasastateprisoninmatewhohadbeenconvictedofrobberyandwaschargedwithaviolent x'"# crimedidnot,withoutmore,justifytheuseofphysicalrestraints.(Id.,  Ԁatp.293.)Thecourt  condemnedthetrialcourtsadoptionof ageneralpolicyofimposingsuchrestraintsuponprisoninmateschargedwithnewoffensesunlessthereisashowingofnecessityontherecord.Thecourtssummarydenialofthemotiontoreleasedefendantfromhisshackleswasnotbaseduponsuchashowingofrecordandimpliesageneralpolicyofshacklingallinmatedefendantsaccusedofviolentcrimes.(Ibid  .)      TheinstantcaseisonallfourswithPeoplev.Duran  ,supra.Itisirrefutablethathere   thetrialcourtmadenofindingsspecifictopetitionerthatwouldhavejustifieditsdecisiontovisiblyshacklehimthroughouthisjurytrial.Thefactthatpetitionerwasaprisoninmatewasnotasufficientreasontoshacklehim.(SeePeoplev._Seaton_(2001)26Cal.4th598_  _,  652.)Therecordisvoidofanymentionofactsorthreatsofviolencebypetitionerorthreatstoescape;indeed,petitionerscounselhasdeclaredthatpetitionerbehavedproperlyatallhiscourtappearances.(Exhibit B.)  Astrialcounselsdeclarationmakesclear,atthetimeofpetitionersjurytrialitwassimplyamatterofpolicyoftheMontereyCountySuperiorCourtstovisiblyshackleallCaliforniaDepartmentofCorrectionsinmatesatallcourtappearances,includingjurytrials.(Exhibit B.)ThetrialcourtsinstructiontothejurytodisregardpetitionersshacklesrevealsthattheMontereyCountySuperiorCourtssimplyexpandedtheDepartmentofCorrectionsspolicyoftransportinginmatesinrestraintstoincludekeepingthoseinmates ($$ restrainedthroughouttheirjurytrials.  IntherecentcaseofUnitedStatesv.Howard(9thCir.2005 ) 429F.3d843  ,theNinth  Circuitconsideredamagistratecourtsgeneralpracticeofrequiringpretrialdetaineestoappearattheirarraignmentswearinglegshackles.Thecourtnotedthatfearofprejudicewasnotatissuebecausethedefendantswereappearingatapretrialhearingbeforeamagistrate,notattrialbeforeajury,butneverthelessobservedthat [_s]hackling_Ԁadefendantinanyjudicialproceedingcanhavenegativeeffects,includingthat shacklingmayconfuseandembarrassthedefendant,therebyimpairinghismentalfaculties8Shacklingmayalsocause  thedefendantphysicalandemotionalpain.(Id.,  Ԁatp.851.)    TherecordshowedthattheUnitedStatesMarshallServicefortheCentralDistrictofCaliforniaconsultedwiththemagistratejudgesandthenenactedapolicyofrequiringdefendantstobeshackledatinitialcourtappearances.(Historically,defendantswerenotroutinelyshackledforsuchappearances.)Therecordwasessentiallysilentastowhetherthepolicywasbasedonanylegitimate_penological_Ԁjustifications.  Thecourtnotedthatsubstantivedueprocessviolationsallegedbypretrialdetaineestypicallyinvolvedchallengestoprisonpolices,towhich [_c]ourts_Ԁordinarilydefertotheexpertjudgmentsandprofessionalexpertiseofcorrectionsofficials.(Ibid.) Asfaras $  requiringthedefendantstoappearinrestraintsincourt,however,theninthcircuitfound &""  [_r]estrictions_Ԁondefendantsduringjudicialproceedings8arenotwithintherealmof ($$ correctionalofficials.Theconductofthejudicialproceedingsisthedomainofthecourts.(Ibid.) Thecourtorderedtheexistingshacklingpolicyrescinded,absentashowingof  adequatejustification.(Id.,atp.852.)     Intheinstantcase,thetrialcourtsunaccountableadoptionofapolicytoroutinelyandvisiblyshackleDepartmentofCorrectionsinmatesattheirjurytrialswithoutindividualizedjustificationdeniedpetitionerhisfundamentalrightstodueprocessoflawandafairtrial.Petitionerwasparadedbeforeassemblingjurors,whocouldhearhismetalchainsrattleasheshuffledpastthemandenteredthecourtroomdoors.Therein,petitionersatnexttohistrialcounselinawhiteprisonjumpsuit,unabletotakenotesastheevidencecameinagainsthimbecausehishandcuffedhandswerelockedontoametal bellychainthejurycouldplainlysee.Inadditiontonotbeingabletotakenotes,petitionersembarrassmentandphysicalpainnodoubtfurtherreducedhisabilitytocommunicatewithhiscounsel.NojurysittinginjudgmentofsuchanaccusedwhositsbeforetheminobviousprisongarbandchainedlikeananimalcanaccordthataccusedwhattheAmericancriminaljusticesystemclaimstogivehim:thepresumptionofinnocence.(See_Rhoden_Ԁv.Rowland   (9thCir.1999)172F.3d633_  _,637;_Duckett_Ԁv._Godinez_(9thCir.1995)67F.3d734_  _,747748, " citingSpainv._Rushen_(9thCir.1989)883F.2d712_  _,720721.) $    Inthiscase,thetrialcourtabdicateditsduty tomaintainajudicialprocessthatisadignifiedprocess8[one]whichincludestherespectfultreatmentofdefendants,[and] ($$ reflectstheimportanceofthematteratissue,guiltorinnocence8(Deckv.Missouri  ,supra,  125S.Ct.atp.2013.)Byfailingtoarticulateanyreasons,letalonea manifestneed,for  itsdecisiontovisiblyshacklepetitionerathisjurytrial,thetrialcourtplainlyabuseditsdiscretion.(Peoplev.Duran  Ԁ(1976)16Cal.3d282,290291.)Underthesefacts,petitioner    neednotdemonstrateactualprejudicetomakeoutadueprocessviolation.TheStatemustprovebeyondareasonabledoubtthatthe[shackling]didnotcontributetotheverdictobtained.(Deckv.Missouri,supra,25S.Ct.atp.2009;Chapmanv.California(1967)386   U.S.18  ,24.)Onthisbasisalone,thiscourtshouldissueawritofhabeascorpusandreversepetitionersconvictions.(U.S.Const.,5th  ,6th  ,&14th  ԀAmends;Calif.Const.,Art.I,sects.7    &15  .)     IIWIW.DEFENSECOUNSELABDICATEDHISDUTYTOEFFECTIVELYREPRESENTPETITIONERBYFAILINGINANYWAYTOCHALLENGETHETRIALCOURTSFORCINGOFPETITIONERTOWEARSHACKLESTHROUGHOUTHISJURYTRIAL,BYFAILINGTOREQUESTTHATPETITIONERBEPERMITTEDTOAPPEARATHISTRIALINCIVILIANCLOTHESRATHERINTHANAPRISONJUMPSUIT,BYFAILINGTOMAKEAMOTIONFORJUDGMENTOFACQUITTALONTWOOFTHETHREEALLEGEDCONSPIRACYCHARGESORTOREQUESTTHETRIALCOURTINSTRUCTTHEJURYTHATITWASAQUESTIONOFFACTFORTHEJURYTODETERMINEWHETHERPETITIONERWASGUILTYORNOTGUILTYOFASINGLEOVERALLCONSPIRACYORMULTIPLESEPARATECONSPIRACIES.TRIALCOUNSELSFAILURETOACTASAREASONABLYCOMPETENTDEFENSELAWYERDENIEDPETITIONERHISFEDERALANDSTATECONSTITUTIONALRIGHTSTODUEPROCESSOFLAWANDAFAIRTRIAL,ASWELLASTOTHEEFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL.  33,;           33X33,  Thiscourtshouldissueawritofhabeascorpusontheseparateanddistinctgroundthatpetitionerwasdeniedhisrighttotheeffectiveassistanceofcounselbytrialcounselsfailuretoprotectpetitionersfundamentalconstitutionalrightstodueprocessoflaw,afairtrial,andtheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.(U.S.Const.,5th  ,6th  ,&14th  ԀAmends;Calif. , Const.,Art.I,sects.7  Ԁ&15  .) 33X  Asiswellsettled,ameritoriousclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselrequiresatwopartshowing:(1)thatcounselsperformancewasbelowtheobjectivestandardofprevailingprofessionalnorms;and(2)thatdefendantwasprejudicedbycounselsfailings. &,"" (Stricklandv.Washington(1984)466U.S.668  ,688695;Peoplev._Ledesma_(1987)43  Cal.3d171_  _,216218;Peoplev.Pope(1979)23Cal.3d412  ,424425.)Withrespecttothe  requisiteshowingofprejudice,adefendantisentitledtoreliefifhecanshow asignificantbutsomethinglessthan50percentlikelihoodofamorefavorableresultabsentcounselserrors.(Peoplev.Howard(1987)190Cal.App.3d41  ,48.)     However,aspetitionerhasarguedsupra,thetrialcourtspracticeofroutinelyand   visiblyshacklingCaliforniaDepartmentofCorrectionsinmatesbroughttojurytrialonnewchargesis,astheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasrecentlyreaffirmed,apracticeso inherentlyprejudicial...thatit<ene        &            0  0` (#(# 8willoftenhavenegativeeffects,but!liketheconsequencesof  compellingadefendanttowearprisonclothingorofforcinghimtostandtrialwhilemedicated!thoseeffectscannotbeshownfromatrialtranscript.  Thus,wereacourt,withoutadequatejustificationordersthedefendanttowearshacklesthatwillbeseenbythejury,thedefendantneednotdemonstrateactualprejudicetomakeoutadueprocessviolation.TheStatemustprovebeyondareasonabledoubtthatthe[shackling]errorcomplainedofdidnotcontributetotheverdictobtained.(Deckv.Missouri  Ԁ(2005)__U.S.__,125  S.Ct.2007,2015 ; Chapmanv.California(1967)386U.S.18  ,24.)' D ` (#` (# Dene                     Astotheissueofwhether counselsperformancewasbelowtheobjectivestandardofprevailingprofessionalnorms,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasmadeclearthat therighttocounselistherighttotheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.(Stricklandv.Washington  , |$  supra,466U.S.atp.686;seealsoPeoplev._Ledesma_  ,supra,43Cal.3datpp.215-218; |&!" Peoplev._Fosselman_(1983)33Cal.3d572_  _,581-584;Peoplev.Pope  Ԁ(1979)23Cal.3d412, |(#$ 425.) Hene        &            0  0` (#(# Thatapersonwhohappenstobealawyerispresentattrialalongsidetheaccused,however,isnotenoughtosatisfytheconstitutionalcommand.TheSixthAmendmentrecognizestherighttotheassistanceofcounselbecauseitenvisionscounselsplayingarolethatiscriticaltotheabilityoftheadversarialsystemtoproducejustresults.Anaccusedisentitledtobeassistedbyanattorney,whetherretainedorappointed,whoplaystherolenecessarytoensurethatthetrialisfair.(Id.  ,atp.685.)'L  ` (#` (# Lene                     Inhisdeclaration,trialcounselhasadmittedhehadnotacticalreasonsforfailingtorequestthetrialcourtunshacklepetitioner,forfailingtorequestthetrialcourtunshacklepetitionershandstoenablehimtotakenotesduringhistrial,forfailingtorequestthetrialcourtmakeeffortstominimizethejurysperceptionofpetitionersshackles,forfailingtorequestthatpetitionerbeallowedtodressforhisjurytrialincivilianclothes,forfailingtomakeaPenalCodesection1118.1  Ԁmotionforjudgmentofacquittalontwoofthethreeallegedconspiracycharges,orforfailingtorequestthetrialcourttoinstructthejurythatitwasaquestionoffactforthejurytodeterminewhetherpetitionerwasguiltyornotguiltyofoneoverallconspiracyormultipleseparateconspiracies.Thecourtshouldviewtrialcounselscandidadmissionsastantamounttoadmissionshewasineffective.   Giventhevirtuallyunanimousjudicialrecognitionofthedangersinherentinrequiringacriminallyaccusedtoappearatjurytrialinvisiblerestraintswithoutashowingof manifestneed,itcannotlogicallybeclaimedthattrialcounselhere _play[ed_]therolenecessarytoensurethatthetrial[was]fair.(Ibid.)Itissimplybeyonddisputethattrial x(#$ counselfailedtoactinamannertobeexpectedofareasonablycompetentattorneyactingasadiligentconscientiousadvocatewhenhefailedtotakeanyactionwhatsoevertoprotectpetitionerfromhavingtohavehishandsandfeetvisiblyshackledthroughouthisjurytrial.(Id.,atpp.423425;Peoplev._Ledesma_  ,supra,43Cal.3datpp.215216.)     WithregardtohisfailuretomakeaPenalCodesection1118.1  Ԁmotionforjudgmentofacquittalandforfailingtorequestthetrialcourtinstructthejuryitwasaquestionoffactforittodeterminewhetherpetitionerwasguiltyornotguiltyofasingleoverallconspiracyormultipleseparateconspiracies,trialcounselagainfailedtoactinareasonablycompetentmanner.Aspetitionerhasbriefedfullyinhisrelatedappeal,theevidenceinthiscasepointedoverwhelminglytoasingleconspiracyratherthantothreeseparateconspiracies.TheinformationallegedthatthethreeconspiraciesoccurredinJune2001,inJuneJuly2001,andJuneAugust2001.(CT1829.)However,theevidenceshowedthatpetitionertelephonedRuben_Ambriz_ԀonJune5and6,2001,andhadalreadyagreedwithRubentoconductasingleongoingdrugsmuggling businessbythetimeofthosecalls.  Inthatregard,inatelephoneconversationonJune5,petitionergaveRubenthenameofSara,afellowinmateswife.Duringthiscallpetitionersaid, Okay,andtomorrowIlltellyouwheretheothersaregoingto.(RT275.)OnJune6,inafollowuptelephoneconversation,petitionergaveRubenthenamesofMaryandTheresa,twootherfellowinmateswives.Intheseconversations,petitionertoldRubentoacquirecertainamountsof ($$ assorteddrugs,todividethemandpackagethemforconcealment,andtoprovidethemtothenamedinmateswivesforthemtosmuggleintotheprisonwhilevisitingtheirhusbands.(RT268270;275;345;347.)IntheJune5thcall,petitionertoldRuben: Okay.Thisisthe  first!becausethefirsttimeisalittlehardbecauseweregoinghereandthere,butfromnow   on,youknow,everythingwillbebetter8Ifthisthinggoeswell,wellknowthatwecan   countonyou.(RT275;278.)  Whentheprosecutionaskedtheofficerwhat,inhisopinion,appellantwasreferringto,theofficeranswered, Itmeansthattheyrevery!verynewtothis,andwith,brackets,  Theyllgetmuchbetter.(RT275.)Obviouslywhatpetitionerwassayingthatthesmugglingoperation willbebetterastimegoesonand,thatifthesmugglingoperationproceedssmoothly, wellknowthatwecancounton[Ruben]tocarryouthisendoftheoperation.  Theprosecutionsownexpertwitness,Officer_Doglietto_,testifiedtoasingleoverallconspiracytosmuggledrugsintotheprison,notseparateunconnectedconspiracies.InregardtoanotherrecordedtelephoneconversationbetweenpetitionerandRubenonJune27,2001,theofficertestifiedasfollows:  Officer_Doglietto_: [PetitionerthensaidtoRuben,]Thisissomethingthatdoesntstop,right?AndRubensays,No,youknowthat.And[petitioner]says,Thereyougo,buddy.ThatswhatIwant,becauseyouknowwhatItoldyou:Ihavealotofguyshereand ($$ theytellmewhen,whenItellthemcalmdown,andhelaughs.Itoldthem,IthinkthisandIthinkthat,anditsreallygoodthatyougavemethatnews,buddy.  DistrictAttorney: Whichnews?  Officer_Doglietto_: HeshappythatRubenisinagreement,theyregoingtokeep