Eyewitness Identification (From Criminal Justice Administration Cases and Materials, Fourth Edition, P 610-637, 1991, Frank W Miller, Robert O Dawson, et al. -- See NCJ-129355)

• NCJ Number: 129365
• Author(s): F W Miller; R O Dawson; G E Dix; R I Parnas
• Date Published: 1991
• Length: 28 pages
• Sale Source: Foundation Press
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Description
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This chapter presents U.S. Supreme Court decisions involving the right to counsel when a suspect is included in a lineup and due process requirements in the process of eyewitness identification.

Abstract

In United States v. Wade (1967), the Court determined that since there is potential for prejudice in the pretrial lineup that may not be capable of reconstruction at trial, the post-indictment lineup is a critical stage of prosecution at which a suspect is as much entitled to counsel as at the trial itself. In such a context, counsel can often avert prejudice and ensure a proper confrontation at the trial. In Manson v. Brathwaite (1977), the Court considered whether the due process clause of the 14th amendment compels the exclusion in a State criminal trial, apart from any consideration of reliability, of pretrial-identification evidence obtained by a police procedure that was both suggestive and unnecessary. In this case, an eyewitness identified the suspect from a single photograph of the suspect left with him by an officer to be viewed alone and at his leisure. The court held that although the photographic identification would have been better served through the use of an array of photographs of various persons, the absence of such a process is not sufficiently serious to exclude the identification evidence. The factfinder should be left to determine the reliability of the witness' identification. Dissents and notes on the cases are included.