Before approving use of a stun belt of current design, which delivers a shock which cannot be lowered from its 50,000 volts nor shortened in its 8-10 second duration, a trial court should determine if these features render the device more onerous than necessary to satisfy the courts security needs by the use of more traditional physical restraints. Under the facts of this case, the court found the use of stun belt to be prejudicial error.
Case Summaries