In Re Davis

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court granted Cecil Davis's personal restraint petition in part, upholding his aggravated first degree murder conviction but ordering a new penalty phase trial. Rejecting presumed prejudice under Cronic, the court held that counsel's failure to object to Davis's ankle shackling caused no actual and substantial prejudice in the guilt phase because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming and precautions concealed the restraints, but the same failure could not be dismissed in the sentencing phase, where restraints bear on character and future dangerousness. Every other ineffective-assistance claim resolved in the visible portion of the opinion—racial-bias voir dire, severance, victim-impact objections, opening statement, closing-argument objections, cross-examination, and mental-health investigation—was rejected for lack of deficiency or prejudice. The remaining issues, including the cruel-and-unusual-punishment and due-process challenges, lie beyond the supplied truncated text.