Smith v. State

Summary

The court held that courtroom bailiffs’ display of thin blue line symbols on their face masks created an unacceptable risk that the jury would consider impermissible pro-law-enforcement messages, violating the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial. It adopted a three-part framework for inherent-prejudice claims and concluded that the defendant satisfied it because he objected, the masks were observable to the jury, and the bailiffs’ role and the surrounding 2020 political climate heightened the risk of prejudice. The court reversed the intermediate appellate judgment and ordered a new trial.