Difference between revisions of "Showups, Lineups, and Photo Arrays"
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
If a criminal defense attorney is representing a client in a jury trial and identification evidence plays a significant role in the case, the defense attorney should try to get a jury instruction on the nature of eyewitness identification. Following is a sample jury instruction used in a U.S. Federal Court: | If a criminal defense attorney is representing a client in a jury trial and identification evidence plays a significant role in the case, the defense attorney should try to get a jury instruction on the nature of eyewitness identification. Following is a sample jury instruction used in a U.S. Federal Court: | ||
| − | + | '''Identification testimony is an expression of belief or impression by the witness. its value depends on the opportunity the witness had to observe the offender at the time of the offense and to make a reliable identification later. | |
In appraising the identification testimony of a witness, you should consider the following: | In appraising the identification testimony of a witness, you should consider the following: | ||
| Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
(1) Are you convinced that the witness had the capacity and an adequate opportunity to observe the offender? | (1) Are you convinced that the witness had the capacity and an adequate opportunity to observe the offender? | ||
Whether the witness had an adequate opportunity to observe the offender at the time of the offense will be affected by such matters as how long or short a time was available, how far or close the witness was, how good were lighting conditions, whether the witness had had occasion to see or know the person in the past... | Whether the witness had an adequate opportunity to observe the offender at the time of the offense will be affected by such matters as how long or short a time was available, how far or close the witness was, how good were lighting conditions, whether the witness had had occasion to see or know the person in the past... | ||
| − | |||
| + | (2) Are you satisfied that the identification made by the witness subsequent to the offense was the product of his own recollection? You may take into account both the strength of the identification, and the circumstances under which the identification was made. | ||
| + | If the identification by the witness may have been influenced by the circumstances under which the defendant was presented to him for identification, you should scrutinize the identification with great care. You may also consider the length of time that lapsed between the occurrence of the crime and the next opportunity for the witness to see defendant, as a factor bearing on the reliability of the identification.... | ||
| − | <ref> United States v. Telfare, 469 F.2d 552 (D.C. Cir 1972) | + | (3) You may take into account any occasions in which the witness failed to make an identification of defendant, or made an identification that was inconsistent with his identification at trial. |
| + | |||
| + | (4) Finally, you must consider the credibility of each identification witness in the same way as any other witness, consider whether he is truthful, and consider whether he had the capacity and opportunity to make a reliable observation on the matter covered on his testimony. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I again emphasize that the burden of proof on the prosecutor extends to every element of the crime charged, and this specifically includes the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt the identity of the defendant as the perpetrator of the crime with which he stands charged. If after examining the testimony, you have a reasonable dounbt as to the accuracy of the identification, you must find the defendant not guilty.''' <ref> United States v. Telfare, 469 F.2d 552 (D.C. Cir 1972) | ||
==Expert Testimony== | ==Expert Testimony== | ||
