Thomas L. Carey, Warden v. Mathew Musladin (549 U.S. 70)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 11, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 549 U.S. 70 · 127 S. Ct. 649
- Decided
- December 11, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2006
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Thomas
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. This Court has recognized that certain courtroom practices are so inherently prejudicial that they deprive the defendant of a fair trial. Estelle v. Williams, 425 U. S. 501, 503-506 (1976); Holbrook v. Flynn, 475 U. S. 560, 568 (1986). In this case, a state court held that buttons displaying the victim’s image worn by the victim’s family during respondent’s trial did not deny respondent his right to a fair trial. We must decide whether that holding was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, as determined by this Court. 28 U. S. C. § 2254(d)(1). We hold that it was not. I On May 13, 1994, respondent Mathew Musladin shot and killed Tom Studer outside the home of Musladin’s estranged wife, Pamela. At trial, Musladin admitted that he killed Studer but argued that he did so in self-defense. A California jury rejected Musladin’s self-defense argument and convicted him of first-degree murder and three related offenses. During Musladin’s trial, several members of Studer’s family sat in the front row of the spectators’ gallery. On at least some of the trial’s 14 days, some members of Studer’s family wore buttons with a photo of Studer on them. Prior to opening statements, Musladin’s counsel moved the court to order the Studer family not to wear the buttons during the trial. The court denied the…
Excerpt of a 11,269-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.