Pretrial Identification: Difference between revisions
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Ddemetriou (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
*2) if it was suggestive, whether there were indicia of reliability such that the witness's testimony should still be admissible even if the procedure was suggestive. | *2) if it was suggestive, whether there were indicia of reliability such that the witness's testimony should still be admissible even if the procedure was suggestive. | ||
---- | |||
See [[Rights of the Accused]] | |||
Revision as of 21:25, 8 June 2010
Background
Key Cases
- United States
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U. S. 188 (1972) - In Neil v. Biggers, the US Supreme Court provided the defendant with a mechanism to challenge a pre-trial identification by requesting a hearing on the validity of the identification.
The two-pronged test asks:
- 1) whether the identification procedure was suggestive, and
- 2) if it was suggestive, whether there were indicia of reliability such that the witness's testimony should still be admissible even if the procedure was suggestive.