Eyewitness identification
Author | Deja Vishny |
Pages | 761-806 |
EYEWITNESS
IDENTIFICATION
13-1
CHAPTER 13
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION
I. INTRODUCTION
II. GOVERNING PRINCIPLES
A. Identification Procedures
§13:01 Procedures Used by Police and Prosecutors
§13:02 Contemporar y Recommendations for Identification Procedures
§13:03 Other Helpful Sources
B. Law re: Admissibility
§13:04 Traditional Legal Test for Eyewitness Identification Admissibility
§13:05 Manson v. Braithwaite
§13:06 Alternatives to Braithwaite Standard
§13:07 Modern Research on Mistaken Identification
[§§13:08-13:09 Reserved]
III. CHALLENGING AN EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION ON TRADITIONAL BRAITHWAITE GROUNDS
A. Before the Hearing
§13:10 Start by Reviewing Investigation Procedure for Suggestiveness
§13:11 Enlist the Help of an Investigator
B. When a Pretrial Identification Procedure Was Used
1. Cross-Examine Officers Involved re: Witness’ Description of Perpetrator
§13:12 Questions Asked of Witnesses in Every Case
§13:13 Questions re: Specific Description of Suspect
2. Cross-Examine Officers Involved re: Pretrial Identification Procedures
a. Pretrial Show-up Identifications
§13:14 Questions re: Suggestiveness of Viewing Conditions
§13:14.1 When the Witness is a Police Officer
§13:15 Challenges to Pretrial Show-up Identifications
b. Photo File “Mug Book” Identifications
§13:16 Governing Principles
§13:17 Cross-Examination Questions re: “Mug Book” Identification
c. Photo Array Identifications
§13:18 In Practice: Put the Right Photos Before the Judge
§13:19 Cross-Examination Questions
§13:20 Arguing Photo Array was Suggestive
d. Live Lineup Identifications
§13:21 Before the Hearing
§13:22 Cross-Examination Questions
§13:23 Arguing a Live Line -Up Should Be Suppressed
[§13:24 Reserved]
EYEWITNESS
IDENTIFICATION
Suppressing Criminal Evidence 13-2
C. When No Pre-Trial Investigation Procedure Was Used
1. Serendipitous Pretrial Identifications
a. Governing Law
§13:25 Perr y v. New Hampshire
§13:26 Case Law Post-Perry
b. Sample Case
§13:27 Facts
§13:28 Prepare for the Hearing
§13:29 Cross-Examine the Victim
§13:29.1 Brief Opportunity to View Robber
§13:29.2 Disguise Obstructed Facial Features
§13:29.3 Gun Focus
§13:29.4 Stress of the Event
§13:29.5 Description Given to Police
§13:29.6 No Identification from Police Photo Files
§13:29.7 Suggestive Identification
§13:30 Cross-Examine Police Witnesses
§13:30.1 Victim’s Description of Robber
§13:30.2 Gun Focus
§13:30.3 Photo Array
§13:31 Call an Expert to Testify
§13:32 Sample Argument
2. First-Time Identifications in Courtroom
§13:33 Governing Principles
§13:34 Older Federal Court Decisions
§13:35 More Recent Federal Court Decisions
§13:36 State Cour t Decisions Precluding First-Time In-Court Identification
§13:37 Move to Preclude a First Time Identification in Court
[§§13:38-13:39 Reserved]
IV. CHALLENGING IDENTIFICATION BASED ON MODERN SCIENCE
A. Governing Principles
§13:40 Modern Science Allows You to Fully Develop Reliability Argument
§13:41 Due Process Analysis
§13:42 Rule of Evidence Analysis
B. Litigating Identification: Bringing Science into the Courtroom
1. Strategy and Tactics
§13:43 Before the Hearing
§13:44 Exper t Testimony at Suppression Hearing
2. Sample Case
§13:45 Facts
§13:46 Cross-Examination of Law Enforcement Officers
§13:47 Presenting Expert Testimony
§13:47.1 Qualify your Expert
§13:47.2 Topics for Questioning Expert on Direct Examination
V. FORMS
Form 13-1 Motion to Suppress – Showup Identification
Form 13-2 Motion to Suppress – Identification Unduly Prejudicial
Form 13-3 Summary of Expert Testimony
EYEWITNESS
IDENTIFICATION
13-3 Eyewitness Identification §13:01
I. INTRODUCTION
Εψεωιτνεσσ τεστιµονψ ισ σοµε οφ τηε µοστ δραµατιχ ανδ περσυασιϖε εϖιδενχε τηατ εντερσ ιντο α χουρτροοµ. Τηε
ϖιχτιµ οφ, ορ ωιτνεσσ το, ωηατ ισ οφτεν α σεριουσ ανδ ϖιολεντ χριµε, συχη ασ α ραπε, αρµεδ−ροββερψ ορ α σηοοτινγ,
ανσωερσ τηε προσεχυτορσ θυεστιον, Χαν ψου ποιντ ουτ τηε µαν ωηο διδ τηισ το ψου? Τηε ϕυρψ ισ αλλ εαρσ ασ τηε
ωιτνεσσ τελλσ τηεµ τηατ τηε περσον ωηο χοµµιττεδ τηε ηορριβλε αχτ ισ ψουρ χλιεντ, σεατεδ νεξτ το ψου ατ χουνσελ ταβλε.
Τηε ωιτνεσσ στατεσ σηε ισ 100% ποσιτιϖε τηισ ισ τηε περπετρατορ ανδ σηελλ νεϖερ φοργετ τηατ φαχε. Τηε ποωερ οφ τηε
τεστιµονψ χαννοτ βε υνδερεστιµατεδ; ιτ ισ τηε εµοτιοναλλψ µοϖινγ πιεχε δε ρεσιστανχε οφ τηε γοϖερνµεντσ χασε,
ωηιχη οφτεν µοϖεσ ϕυρορσ ινεξοραβλψ το ρεαχη α γυιλτψ ϖερδιχτ.
Ασ ποωερφυλ ασ τηισ τεστιµονψ ισ, ιτ ισ φρεθυεντλψ ερρονεουσ. Τηε Νατιοναλ Ρεγιστρψ οφ Εξονερατιονσ
1
λιστεδ 2,522
µαϕορ χοντριβυτινγ φαχτορ. Ιν σεξυαλ ασσαυλτσ, τηε νυµβερ χλιµβσ µυχη ηιγηερ; 70% οφ αλλ ωρονγφυλ χονϖιχτιονσ ιν
εξιστεδ, Εδωιν Βορχηαρδ, α Ψαλε λαω προφεσσορ, νοτεδ ιν ηισ 1932 βοοκ, Χονϖιχτινγ τηε Ιννοχεντ: Σιξτψ−Φιϖε Αχτυαλ
Ερρορσ οφ Χριµιναλ ϑυστιχε
α λεαδινγ χαυσε οφ φαλσε χονϖιχτιονσ.
−
χονϖιχτιονσ ιν τηε Υνιτεδ Στατεσ, ανδ ρεσπονσιβλε φορ µορε ωρονγφυλ χονϖιχτιονσ τηαν αλλ οτηερ χαυσεσ χοµβινεδ, ονλψ
II. GOVERNING PRINCIPLES
A. Identification Procedures
§13:01 Procedures Used by Police and Prosecutors
Σηοωυπσ.
ανδ τηε συσπεχτ ισ χλεαρλψ ιν πολιχε χυστοδψ. Νο αττεµπτσ αρε µαδε το χοµπαρε τηε κνοων συσπεχτ ωιτη
οτηερσ ορ το χρεατε ιδεαλ ϖιεωινγ χονδιτιονσ.
Photo iles.
το ϖιεω µυλτιπλε παστ βοοκινγ πηοτοσ το σεε ιφ τηεψ ρεχογνιζε τηε περπετρατορ. Ιν τηε παστ τηισ ωασ δονε
1
−
To continue reading
Request your trial