Chanel Wiley v. United States

For over fifty years, this Court’s precedent has provided that physical restraints are inherently prejudicial. They present an unacceptable risk of improperly influencing a juror’s decision on guilt or innocence. See Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970); Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (1976); Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. 127 (1992); Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622 (2005). In the decision below, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected those precedents, crafted a new prejudice framework, and held that, under that new framework, ankle monitors are not inherently prejudicial. The question presented is: Whether a criminal defendant whose governmentimposed restraint is perceptible to a jury must show actual prejudice, as the decision below held, or whether prejudice inheres, as this Court has held. (i)