People of Michigan v. Derrick Christopher McCants, 351420

In April 2019 James Sorensen was held captive in Derrick McCants’s apartment for several days, during which he was beaten, threatened, injected with methamphetamine, robbed, and sexually assaulted (forced to perform fellatio twice).
Sorensen suffered significant facial fractures and other bruising; medical testimony and photographs corroborated injuries, and a video recorded on a phone depicted some abuse.
McCants and confederates used Sorensen’s van and credit cards; police later found Sorensen’s documents and suspected blood evidence in the van and drugs in McCants’s room and/or the van.
McCants was convicted by jury of multiple felonies including two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, torture, unlawful imprisonment, various assaults, possession of methamphetamine, and unlawful use of a motor vehicle.
On appeal McCants challenged (1) that jurors saw him in shackles when returned from lunch and (2) that defense witnesses appeared shackled and in jail clothing, arguing both violated his right to a fair trial.
The trial court did not hold an evidentiary hearing or give curative instructions; the defense did not formally request remedies at trial, so the appeals court reviewed under plain-error standards.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurors allegedly saw defendant shackled coming back from lunch	No evidence jurors actually saw shackles; any brief/inadvertent view during transport is permissible and presumption of innocence instructions cure any prejudice	Jurors saw him shackled which could undermine presumption of innocence and deny fair trial	Issue unpreserved; plain-error review fails because record lacks proof jurors saw shackles and jury instructions cured any possible prejudice; no reversal
Defense witnesses testified shackled and in jail clothes	Any prejudice was not outcome-determinative; defense used witnesses’ incarceration as credibility argument	Visible shackles/jail garb for defense witnesses undermined credibility and denied fair trial; court erred by not making a necessity finding	Trial court erred by allowing shackled witnesses without a necessity finding, but error was harmless: defense leveraged jail attire as strategy and testimony was not outcome-determinative given strong prosecution evidence; conviction affirmed

People v Payne, 285 Mich App 181 (2009) (defendant generally entitled to be free of shackles; shackling requires record support of necessity)
People v Horn, 279 Mich App 31 (2008) (restraint during transport permitted; jurors' brief/inadvertent view is not presumptively prejudicial)
United States v Olano, 62 F3d 1180 (9th Cir. 1995) (brief/inadvertent glimpse of restraints not inherently prejudicial)
People v Carines, 460 Mich 750 (1999) (plain-error review framework for unpreserved constitutional claims)
People v Abraham, 256 Mich App 265 (2003) (jurors presumed to follow instructions; instructions generally cure most errors)
People v Banks, 249 Mich App 247 (2002) (shackling a witness allowed only to prevent escape, injury, or preserve order; visible restraints may affect credibility)
People v Metamora Water Serv, Inc., 276 Mich App 376 (2007) (issues must be raised, addressed, and decided in the lower court to be preserved for appeal)