Difference between revisions of "Showups, Lineups, and Photo Arrays"

From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
Eyewitness identification evidence is extremely persuasive evidence for a criminal prosecution. Eyewitness testimony is powerful because we assume it to be the most reliable. However, studies have shown that eyewitness evidence is often mistaken and that eyewitnesses are prone to suggestive identification procedures. The problem of [[eyewitness misidentification | Eyewitness Misidentification]] is often exacerbated by out-of-court identification procedures.
+
Eyewitness identification evidence is extremely persuasive evidence for a criminal prosecution. Eyewitness testimony is powerful because we assume it to be the most reliable. However, studies have shown that eyewitness evidence is often mistaken and that eyewitnesses are prone to suggestive identification procedures. The problem of [[Eyewitness Misidentification | eyewitness misidentification]] is often exacerbated by out-of-court identification procedures.
  
The United States Constitution's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not extend to identification procedures that include blood <ref> Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)<ref> or handwriting<ref> Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967), fingerprints, x-rays, etc. However, if an identification is unusually invasive it may be inadmissible for other reasons. For instance, in Winston v. Lee, the U.S. Supreme Court held that forcing a defendant to undergo surgery which requires general anesthetic in order to obtain evidence violates the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure when the evidence is not absolutely necessary to convict the defendant.<ref> Winston v. Lee, 470 U.S. 753 (1985)<ref/>
+
The United States Constitution's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not extend to identification procedures that include blood <ref> Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)<ref> or handwriting <ref> Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967)</ref>, fingerprints, x-rays, etc. However, if an identification is unusually invasive it may be inadmissible for other reasons. For instance, in Winston v. Lee, the U.S. Supreme Court held that forcing a defendant to undergo surgery which requires general anesthetic in order to obtain evidence violates the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure when the evidence is not absolutely necessary to convict the defendant.<ref> Winston v. Lee, 470 U.S. 753 (1985)<ref/>
  
  

Revision as of 11:30, 4 July 2010

Eyewitness identification evidence is extremely persuasive evidence for a criminal prosecution. Eyewitness testimony is powerful because we assume it to be the most reliable. However, studies have shown that eyewitness evidence is often mistaken and that eyewitnesses are prone to suggestive identification procedures. The problem of eyewitness misidentification is often exacerbated by out-of-court identification procedures.

The United States Constitution's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination does not extend to identification procedures that include blood Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag, fingerprints, x-rays, etc. However, if an identification is unusually invasive it may be inadmissible for other reasons. For instance, in Winston v. Lee, the U.S. Supreme Court held that forcing a defendant to undergo surgery which requires general anesthetic in order to obtain evidence violates the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure when the evidence is not absolutely necessary to convict the defendant.Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag


Showup

Lineup

Photo Array

Notes