746 JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY
juries.^99 The Court found that forcing a defendant to wear prison
attire before a jury infringed upon his or her Fourteenth
Amendment due process rights.^100 A defendant clothed in an
orange jumpsuit at trial can give the jury the impression that the
defendant is more likely to have committed the crime, something
the Court deemed inconsistent with the presumption of
innocence in the American justice system.^101 Even though the
character evidence derived from the defendant’s appearance was
inadmissible, the Court recognized the likely prejudicial effect of
the defendant’s clothing on the jury.^102 The Court concluded that
jurors, at least in some instances, are unable to ignore a
defendant’s appearance.^103
In 2010, a Florida judge recognized the likelihood of a
defendant’s appearance impacting the jury.^104 John Ditullio faced
the death penalty for charges related to the violent stabbing and
death of a teenager but ultimately received life in prison without
the possibility of parole.^105 Ditullio’s defense team successfully
argued that his neo-Nazi tattoos—although acquired after his
arrest—would be too distracting and too prejudicial for the
(^99) Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501, 505 (1976) (“The defendant’s
clothing is so likely to be a continuing influence throughout the trial that, not
unlike placing a jury in the custody of deputy sheriffs who were also
witnesses for the prosecution, an unacceptable risk is presented of
impermissible factors coming into play.”).
(^100) Id. at 512–13.
(^101) Id. at 503 (“The presumption of innocence, although not articulated in
the Constitution, is a basic component of a fair trial under our system of
criminal justice.”); see also THORNTON, supra note 83, at 111–12
(supporting the proposition that a defendant who wears prison attire is more
likely to be convicted); Shepard, supra note 82, at 2208.
(^102) Estelle, 425 U.S. at 505.
(^103) Id. at 518 (finding that prison attire “surely tends to brand [the
defendant] in the eyes of the jurors with an unmistakable mark of guilt”).
(^104) State v. Ditullio, No. CRC06-05827CFAWS (Fla. Cir. Ct. 2009); see
also Schwartz, supra note 85.
(^105) Carlin DeGuerin Miller, John Allen Ditullio Guilty Verdict: Neo-Nazi
Convicted of Murder, Sentenced to Life in Prison, CBS NEWS (Dec. 17,
2010, 1:14 PM), http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20026011-
504083.html.