neil
biggers
argued
decided
december
respondent
convicted
rape
evidence
consisted
part
testimony
concerning
victim
visual
voice
identification
respondent
showup
occurred
seven
months
rape
victim
presence
assailant
considerable
time
directly
observed
indoors
full
moon
outdoors
testified
doubt
respondent
assailant
previously
given
police
description
assailant
confirmed
police
officer
showup
identified
respondent
victim
made
identification
others
presented
previous
showups
lineups
photographs
police
asserted
used
showup
technique
difficulty
finding
lineup
individuals
generally
fitting
respondent
description
given
victim
tennessee
affirmance
conviction
affirmed
equally
divided
respondent
brought
habeas
corpus
action
district
rejecting
petitioner
contention
affirmance
constituted
actual
adjudication
within
meaning
thus
barred
review
showup
identification
federal
habeas
corpus
proceeding
district
noting
lineup
relatively
reliable
showup
held
confrontation
suggestive
violate
due
process
appeals
affirmed
held
equally
divided
affirmance
respondent
state
conviction
bar
federal
relief
habeas
corpus
since
affirmance
merely
ends
process
direct
review
settles
issue
law
pp
identification
may
suggestive
totality
circumstances
victim
identification
respondent
reliable
properly
allowed
go
jury
pp
powell
delivered
opinion
burger
white
blackmun
rehnquist
joined
brennan
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
douglas
stewart
joined
post
marshall
took
part
consideration
decision
case
bart
durham
iii
assistant
attorney
general
tennessee
argued
cause
petitioner
brief
david
pack
attorney
general
michael
meltsner
argued
cause
respondent
brief
jack
greenberg
anthony
amsterdam
avon
williams
alexander
looby
louis
lefkowitz
attorney
general
new
york
pro
se
samuel
hirshowitz
first
assistant
attorney
general
maria
marcus
assistant
attorney
general
filed
brief
attorney
general
new
york
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
shirley
fingerhood
richard
green
burt
neuborne
melvin
wulf
filed
brief
american
civil
liberties
union
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
justice
powell
delivered
opinion
jury
trial
tennessee
respondent
convicted
rape
sentenced
years
imprisonment
state
evidence
consisted
part
testimony
concerning
identification
respondent
victim
tennessee
affirmed
biggers
state
certiorari
judgment
tennessee
affirmed
equally
divided
biggers
tennessee
marshall
participating
respondent
brought
federal
habeas
corpus
action
raising
several
claims
reply
petitioner
contended
claims
barred
provides
pertinent
part
habeas
corpus
proceeding
brought
behalf
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
prior
judgment
appeal
review
writ
certiorari
instance
prisoner
decision
state
shall
conclusive
issues
fact
law
respect
asserted
denial
federal
right
constitutes
ground
discharge
habeas
corpus
proceeding
actually
adjudicated
therein
intended
scope
phrase
actually
adjudicated
must
determined
reference
peculiarities
federal
jurisdiction
context
enacted
jurisdiction
hear
state
prisoner
claims
habeas
corpus
first
expressly
conferred
federal
courts
judiciary
act
stat
thereafter
decisions
established
res
judicata
inapplicable
salinger
loisel
fay
noia
also
federal
courts
obliged
appropriate
cases
redetermine
issues
fact
federal
law
token
developed
number
limiting
principles
restrain
relitigation
among
successive
habeas
corpus
application
raising
grounds
rejected
previous
application
might
denied
without
reaching
merits
salinger
loisel
supra
congress
codified
version
salinger
rule
redesignated
amended
shields
senseless
repetition
claims
state
prisoners
without
endangering
principle
entitled
limitations
aside
redetermination
federal
claims
federal
habeas
corpus
mind
purpose
also
enacted
becomes
clear
subsection
embodies
recognition
actually
adjudicated
claim
direct
appeal
certiorari
state
prisoner
federal
redetermination
entitled
subsequent
application
habeas
corpus
raising
claims
serve
valid
purpose
add
unnecessarily
already
overburdened
system
criminal
justice
light
review
cases
explicating
disposition
affirmed
equally
divided
apparently
first
occasion
equal
division
antelope
wheat
simply
affirmed
point
division
without
much
discussion
faced
similar
division
next
term
affirmed
chief
justice
marshall
explaining
principles
law
argued
settled
judgment
affirmed
divided
opinion
upon
etting
bank
wheat
later
elaborated
cases
appellant
petitioner
asks
overturn
lower
decree
judges
divided
reversal
order
made
judgment
therefore
stands
full
force
indeed
settled
practice
case
enter
judgment
affirmance
convenient
mode
expressing
fact
cause
finally
disposed
conformity
action
proceed
enforce
judgment
legal
effect
appeal
writ
error
dismissed
durant
essex
wall
ii
proceed
consider
respondent
due
process
claim
claim
turns
upon
facts
must
first
review
relevant
testimony
jury
trial
habeas
corpus
hearing
regarding
rape
identification
victim
testified
trial
evening
january
youth
butcher
knife
grabbed
doorway
kitchen
grabbed
behind
grappled
twisted
floor
threw
floor
light
kitchen
kitchen
seen
yes
see
looked
face
dark
right
doorway
enough
light
bedroom
shining
yes
see
see
light
see
know
yes
tr
rec
pp
gave
police
federal
district
characterized
general
description
describing
fat
flabby
smooth
skin
bushy
hair
youthful
voice
additionally
though
mentioned
district
testified
habeas
corpus
hearing
described
assailant
years
old
five
feet
ten
inches
six
feet
tall
weighing
pounds
dark
brown
complexion
testimony
substantially
corroborated
police
officer
testifying
notes
several
occasions
course
next
seven
months
viewed
suspects
home
police
station
lineups
others
showups
shown
photographs
told
police
man
pictured
one
photographs
features
similar
assailant
identified
none
suspects
august
police
called
station
view
respondent
detained
another
charge
effort
construct
suitable
lineup
police
checked
city
jail
city
juvenile
home
finding
one
either
place
fitting
respondent
unusual
physical
description
conducted
showup
instead
showup
consisted
two
detectives
walking
respondent
past
victim
victim
request
police
directed
respondent
say
shut
kill
testimony
trial
altogether
clear
whether
victim
first
identified
asked
repeat
words
made
identification
spoken
event
victim
testified
doubt
identification
habeas
corpus
hearing
elaborated
response
questioning
doubt
mean
sure
see
first
laid
eyes
knew
individual
face
well
something
think
ever
forget
believe
say
first
laid
eyes
time
referring
identified
seen
courthouse
took
view
suspect
app
iii
considered
four
occasions
scope
due
process
protection
admission
evidence
deriving
suggestive
identification
procedures
stovall
denno
held
defendant
claim
confrontation
conducted
unnecessarily
suggestive
conducive
irreparable
mistaken
identification
denied
due
process
law
held
must
determined
totality
circumstances
went
find
facts
case
us
due
process
violated
emphasizing
critical
condition
injured
witness
justified
showup
hospital
room
trial
witness
whose
view
suspect
time
crime
brief
testified
identification
several
police
officers
present
hospital
room
also
made
identification
subsequently
case
witnesses
made
identifications
arguably
stemming
previous
exposure
suggestive
photographic
array
restated
governing
test
hold
case
must
considered
facts
convictions
based
eyewitness
identification
trial
following
pretrial
identification
photograph
set
aside
ground
photographic
identification
procedure
impermissibly
suggestive
give
rise
substantial
likelihood
irreparable
misidentification
simmons
case
date
found
identification
procedures
violative
due
process
foster
california
witness
failed
identify
foster
first
time
confronted
despite
suggestive
lineup
police
arranged
showup
witness
make
tentative
identification
ultimately
yet
another
confrontation
time
lineup
witness
able
muster
definite
identification
held
identifications
inadmissible
observing
identifications
inevitable
circumstances
recent
case
coleman
alabama
held
admissible
identification
witness
fleeting
real
good
look
assailant
headlights
passing
car
witness
testified
pretrial
suppression
hearing
identified
one
petitioners
among
participants
lineup
police
placed
participants
formal
line
justice
brennan
four
members
stated
evidence
support
finding
identification
entirely
based
upon
observations
time
assault
induced
conduct
lineup
general
guidelines
emerge
cases
relationship
suggestiveness
misidentification
first
apparent
primary
evil
avoided
substantial
likelihood
irreparable
misidentification
simmons
phrase
coined
standard
determining
whether
identification
admissible
wake
suggestive
identification
deletion
irreparable
serves
equally
well
standard
admissibility
testimony
concerning
identification
likelihood
misidentification
violates
defendant
right
due
process
basis
exclusion
evidence
foster
suggestive
confrontations
disapproved
increase
likelihood
misidentification
unnecessarily
suggestive
ones
condemned
reason
increased
chance
misidentification
gratuitous
stovall
makes
clear
admission
evidence
showup
without
violate
due
process
less
clear
cases
whether
intimated
district
unnecessary
suggestiveness
alone
requires
exclusion
evidence
inclined
agree
courts
police
exhaust
possibilities
seeking
persons
physically
comparable
respondent
think
evidence
must
therefore
excluded
purpose
strict
rule
barring
evidence
unnecessarily
suggestive
confrontations
deter
police
using
less
reliable
procedure
reliable
one
may
available
based
assumption
every
instance
admission
evidence
confrontation
offends
due
process
clemons
app
leventhal
concurring
cf
gilbert
california
mapp
ohio
rule
place
present
case
since
confrontation
trial
preceded
stovall
denno
supra
first
gave
notice
suggestiveness
confrontation
procedures
anything
matter
argued
jury
turn
central
question
whether
totality
circumstances
identification
reliable
even
though
confrontation
procedure
suggestive
indicated
cases
factors
considered
evaluating
likelihood
misidentification
include
opportunity
witness
view
criminal
time
crime
witness
degree
attention
accuracy
witness
prior
description
criminal
level
certainty
demonstrated
witness
confrontation
length
time
crime
confrontation
applying
factors
disagree
district
conclusion
part
discussed
think
district
focused
unduly
relative
reliability
lineup
opposed
showup
issue
expert
testimony
taken
evidentiary
hearing
must
kept
mind
also
trial
conducted
stovall
therefore
incentive
lacking
parties
make
record
trial
facts
corroborating
undermining
identification
testimony
addressed
jury
jury
apparently
found
identification
reliable
state
testimony
federal
evidentiary
hearing
may
well
neatly
fit
case
law
surely
nothing
undermine
state
record
fully
corroborated
identification
find
district
conclusions
critical
facts
unsupported
record
clearly
erroneous
victim
spent
considerable
period
time
assailant
half
hour
adequate
artificial
light
house
full
moon
outdoors
least
twice
house
later
woods
faced
directly
intimately
casual
observer
rather
victim
one
personally
humiliating
crimes
description
police
included
assailant
approximate
age
height
weight
complexion
skin
texture
build
voice
might
satisfied
proust
ordinarily
thorough
doubt
respondent
person
raped
nature
crime
rarely
witnesses
rape
victim
often
limited
opportunity
observation
victim
practical
nurse
profession
unusual
opportunity
observe
identify
assailant
testified
habeas
corpus
hearing
something
face
think
ever
forget
app
sure
lapse
seven
months
rape
confrontation
seriously
negative
factor
cases
however
testimony
undisputed
victim
made
previous
identification
showups
lineups
photographic
showings
record
reliability
thus
good
one
previously
resisted
whatever
suggestiveness
inheres
showup
weighing
factors
find
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
evidence
properly
allowed
go
jury
affirmed
part
reversed
part
remanded
justice
marshall
took
part
consideration
decision
case
footnotes
aided
confirmed
view
thoughtful
opinion
judge
mansfield
ex
rel
radich
criminal
city
new
york
pet
cert
pending
sub
nom
ross
radich
dissent
us
decline
address
merits
district
evidentiary
hearing
found
due
process
violated
appeals
reviewing
entire
record
found
conclusions
fact
district
judge
clearly
erroneous
said
depart
practice
reverse
findings
fact
concurred
two
lower
courts
unless
shown
clearly
erroneous
post
rule
practice
lightly
overturn
concurrent
findings
fact
two
lower
federal
courts
salutary
one
followed
applicable
think
inapplicable
dispute
parties
much
elemental
facts
constitutional
significance
attached
moreover
habeas
corpus
case
facts
contained
primarily
state
record
equally
available
us
federal
courts
evidentiary
hearing
district
purported
confined
two
specific
issues
deem
controlling
nine
cases
cited
dissenting
opinion
support
rule
practice
urged
upon
us
eight
involved
civil
litigation
federal
system
one
cases
cited
boulden
holman
involved
habeas
corpus
review
simply
held
basis
independent
study
entire
record
conclusion
reached
district
appeals
justified
trial
one
police
officers
present
identification
testified
explicitly
words
spoken
identification
victim
testified
physical
characteristics
caused
able
identify
first
uh
size
next
remember
voice
voice
describe
voice
jury
well
voice
immature
youth
call
immature
youth
boys
first
thing
made
think
boy
tr
rec
see
clemons
app
mcgowan
en
banc
cert
denied
present
case
controversy
view
irrelevant
whether
testified
habeas
corpus
hearing
victim
actually
made
identification
think
evident
many
testimonial
links
identification
defendant
answer
yes
recognize
testimony
concerning
identification
inadmissible
conviction
must
overturned
district
stated
case
appears
sides
admit
generally
reliable
arranged
fact
done
tended
needlessly
decrease
fairness
identification
process
petitioner
subjected
app
see
ex
rel
phipps
follette
friendly
cert
denied
respondent
attaches
weight
failure
victim
daughter
identify
apart
fact
bear
directly
reliability
mother
identification
girl
years
old
best
tell
brief
view
assailant
across
room
respondent
habeas
corpus
petition
raised
number
claims
including
one
challenging
legality
detention
time
viewed
victim
courts
address
claims
justice
brennan
justice
douglas
justice
stewart
concur
concurring
part
dissenting
part
granted
certiorari
case
determine
whether
affirmance
equally
divided
respondent
state
conviction
constitutes
actual
adjudication
within
meaning
thus
bars
subsequent
consideration
issues
federal
habeas
corpus
holds
today
affirmance
bar
federal
relief
fully
concur
aspect
opinion
regrettably
however
also
addresses
merits
delves
factual
background
case
reverse
district
finding
upheld
appeals
totality
circumstances
showup
impermissibly
suggestive
give
rise
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
unjustified
departure
practice
reverse
findings
fact
concurred
two
lower
courts
unless
shown
clearly
erroneous
see
blau
lehman
faulkner
gibbs
dickinson
commercial
credit
chemical
foundation
baker
schofield
towson
moore
cf
boulden
holman
recognizes
identification
obtained
result
unnecessarily
suggestive
showup
may
still
introduced
evidence
totality
circumstances
identification
retains
strong
indicia
reliability
extensive
hearing
careful
review
state
record
however
district
found
circumstances
case
existed
intolerable
risk
misidentification
moreover
making
determination
specifically
found
complaining
witness
get
opportunity
obtain
good
view
suspect
commission
crime
confrontation
conducted
near
time
alleged
crime
rather
seven
months
commission
complaining
witness
unable
give
good
physical
description
assailant
police
app
appeals
conducted
review
record
upheld
district
findings
entirety
although
case
seem
fall
squarely
within
bounds
rule
seems
suggest
rule
inapplicable
habeas
corpus
case
facts
contained
primarily
state
record
equally
available
us
federal
courts
ante
rule
however
rests
upon
mere
deference
trier
fact
firsthand
opportunity
observe
testimony
gauge
credibility
witnesses
rule
also
serves
indispensable
judicial
making
unnecessary
waste
scarce
time
resources
minor
factual
questions
already
accorded
consideration
two
federal
courts
whose
resolution
without
significance
except
parties
immediately
involved
thus
rule
must
logically
apply
even
lower
courts
findings
fact
based
primarily
upon
state
record
argues
however
rule
irrelevant
view
dispute
parties
much
elemental
facts
constitutional
significance
attached
ante
agree
even
cursory
examination
opinion
reveals
concern
limited
solely
proper
application
legal
principles
rather
extends
essentially
de
novo
inquiry
elemental
facts
nature
victim
opportunity
observe
assailant
type
description
victim
gave
police
time
crime
although
might
reasonably
disagree
lower
courts
findings
matters
rule
wisely
inhibits
us
cavalierly
substituting
view
facts
simply
might
adopt
different
construction
evidence
resolve
ambiguities
differently
contrary
findings
final
absence
exceptional
showing
error
comstock
group
institutional
investors
record
us
simply
susceptible
showing
indeed
petitioner
argue
otherwise
therefore
dismiss
writ
certiorari
improvidently
granted
insofar
relates
question
questions
presented