reasonable provocation” or “sudden combat” sufficient for an ordinary person to be driven to a state of passion, anger, fear, fright, or nervous excitement so as to eclipse his capacity for reflection or restraint. See Commonwealth v. Bianchi, 435 Mass. 316, 328-329 (2001). Having received an instruction to which he was not entitled by the evidence, we do not. find a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice in counsel’s arguing only that portion of the evidence that was consistent with and supported the rest of his theory of diminished capacity. f. Clothing worn by LaCava during trial. While it is unconstitutional to compel a defendant to stand trial in prison clothing, see Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501, 512 (1976); Commonwealth v. Jackson, 388 Mass. 98, 107-108 (1983) (<HOLDING>), this is not such a case. LaCava never
holding defendant not compelled to wear prison clothing holding that state prison officials enjoy wide discretion in regards to a prison boards finding of guilt holding that prisoner must show prison officials were deliberately indifferent to prison conditions to establish an eighth amendment violation holding required changes in prison policy not burdensome in light of the overall cost of operating the prison holding that prison conditions are those aspects of prison life affecting the entire prison population