By Daniel Wiessner 

ALBANY, N.Y., Nov 20 (Reuters) - The Court of Appeals on Tuesday rebuffed a bid by a man convicted of offering a 12-year-old boy money to expose himself, finding it was harmless error to have kept the man handcuffed and shackled during a non-jury trial.

In a 5-1 decision, the court on Tuesday affirmed the conviction of Emil Best for endangering the welfare of a child.

The court found that because there was overwhelming evidence against Best, including his own admission that he offered the boy $50 to show Best his penis as a joke, the trail judge's failure to state a reason for restraining him did not warrant a new trial.

"Given (the) quantum of evidence, we do not think there is any reasonable possibility that (Best's) appearance in handcuffs contributed to (Nassau County District Court Judge Sondra Pardes's) finding of guilt," Judge Carmen Ciparick wrote for the court.

During a pretrial hearing and the 2008 trial, Best's attorney asked Pardes at least three times to remove his client's handcuffs and shackles, the court said. Pardes ordered that Best have his hands cuffed in the front, rather than behind his back, but otherwise denied the requests.

The judge did not give any reason for keeping Best restrained, the Court of Appeals said.

Pardes convicted Best of endangering the welfare of a child.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, last year affirmed, finding that Pardes, as a judge, was "uniquely capable ... of making an objective determination" about Best's guilt despite his restraints.

The Court of Appeals on Tuesday upheld the conviction because of the evidence against Best, but Ciparick nevertheless noted, "Judges are human, and the sight of a defendant in restraints may unconsciously influence even a judicial fact finder."

Judges Victoria Graffeo, Eugene Pigott, Susan Read and Robert Smith concurred.

In dissent, Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman said restraints undermine the presumption of innocence, even during bench trials, and judges are obligated to justify their use.

"In a bench trial where the court chooses to keep a defendant in shackles without the adequate record justification, the judge prioritizes convenience over the administration of justice," Lippman wrote.

Best's attorney, Tammy Feman, and the Nassau County District Attorney's office did not return requests for comment.

The case is the People v. Emil Best, New York State Court of Appeals, No. 194.

For the prosecution: Nassau County Assistant District Attorney Joanna Hershey.

For Best: Tammy Feman of the Legal Aid Society of Nassau County.

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook