Case Explained: United States of America v. Moreion Lindsey

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-17 The eighth-circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment and sentence, rejecting Moreion Lindsey’s claim that he was entitled to a new trial due to the use of leg restraints during his trial without adequate judicial findings. The court applied an abuse-of-discretion standard, balancing the risk of prejudice against the need for courtroom order and custody security. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion because it adequately justified the restraints by citing Lindsey’s specific violent criminal history—including prior convictions for assault and firearm possession—and the serious nature of his pending murder-for-hire charges. Additionally, the court found that any potential prejudice was mitigated by the use of table skirts to conceal the restraints from the jury, with no evidence suggesting the jury actually saw them. The court further determined that Lindsey waived or failed to preserve his objection because his counsel indicated he did not care about the issue and did not request specific findings at trial. Regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in *Deck v. Missouri*, the court ruled that its stricter “beyond a reasonable doubt” prejudice standard applies only when restraints are visible to the jury; since the restraints were concealed and there was adequate justification for their use, *Deck* did not require the government to prove the absence of prejudice. Consequently, the judgment remains in effect, and no new trial is ordered. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.