perry
new
hampshire
argued
november
decided
january
around
august
nashua
new
hampshire
police
department
received
call
reporting
male
trying
break
cars
parked
lot
caller
apartment
building
officer
responding
call
asked
eyewitness
nubia
blandon
describe
man
blandon
pointed
kitchen
window
said
man
saw
breaking
car
standing
parking
lot
next
police
officer
petitioner
barion
perry
arrest
followed
identification
trial
perry
moved
suppress
blandon
identification
ground
admitting
trial
violate
due
process
new
hampshire
trial
denied
motion
determine
whether
due
process
prohibits
introduction
identification
trial
superior
said
decisions
instruct
inquiry
trial
must
first
decide
whether
police
used
unnecessarily
suggestive
identification
procedure
must
next
consider
whether
procedure
tainted
resulting
identification
render
unreliable
thus
inadmissible
perry
challenge
found
failed
step
one
blandon
identification
result
unnecessarily
suggestive
procedure
employed
police
jury
subsequently
convicted
perry
theft
unauthorized
taking
appeal
perry
argued
trial
erred
requiring
initial
showing
police
arranged
suggestive
identification
procedure
suggestive
circumstances
alone
perry
contended
suffice
require
evaluation
reliability
eyewitness
identification
allowing
presented
jury
new
hampshire
rejected
perry
argument
affirmed
conviction
held
due
process
clause
require
preliminary
judicial
inquiry
reliability
eyewitness
identification
identification
procured
unnecessarily
suggestive
circumstances
arranged
law
enforcement
pp
constitution
protects
defendant
conviction
based
evidence
questionable
reliability
prohibiting
introduction
evidence
affording
defendant
means
persuade
jury
evidence
discounted
unworthy
credit
evidence
extremely
unfair
admission
violates
fundamental
conceptions
justice
dowling
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
due
process
clause
preclude
admission
contending
due
process
clause
implicated
perry
relies
series
decisions
involving
identification
procedures
see
stovall
denno
simmons
foster
california
neil
biggers
manson
brathwaite
cases
detail
approach
appropriately
used
determine
whether
due
process
requires
suppression
eyewitness
identification
tainted
police
arrangement
first
due
process
concerns
arise
law
enforcement
officers
use
identification
procedure
suggestive
unnecessary
biggers
even
police
use
procedure
however
suppression
resulting
identification
inevitable
consequence
brathwaite
biggers
instead
due
process
requires
courts
assess
basis
whether
improper
police
conduct
created
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
eliability
eyewitness
identification
linchpin
evaluation
brathwaite
indicators
witness
ability
make
accurate
identification
outweighed
corrupting
effect
law
enforcement
suggestion
identification
suppressed
otherwise
identification
assuming
barrier
admission
submitted
jury
pp
perry
argues
mere
happenstance
cases
stovall
line
involved
improper
police
action
rationale
underlying
decisions
perry
asserts
calls
rule
requiring
trial
judges
prescreen
eyewitness
evidence
reliability
time
identification
made
suggestive
circumstances
disagrees
reliability
linchpin
admissibility
due
process
clause
brathwaite
perry
contends
matter
whether
law
enforcement
responsible
creating
suggestive
circumstances
marred
identification
argument
removes
brathwaite
statement
mooring
attributing
meaning
fair
reading
opinion
bear
due
process
check
reliability
brathwaite
made
plain
comes
play
defendant
establishes
improper
police
conduct
perry
contention
also
ignores
key
premise
brathwaite
primary
aim
excluding
identification
evidence
obtained
unnecessarily
suggestive
circumstances
deter
law
enforcement
use
improper
procedures
first
place
deterrence
rationale
inapposite
cases
like
perry
improper
police
conduct
perry
also
places
significant
weight
wade
describing
decision
anchored
improper
police
conduct
risk
police
rigging
danger
prompted
wade
extend
defendant
right
counsel
cover
postindictment
lineups
showups
perry
position
also
open
door
judicial
preview
banner
due
process
eyewitness
identifications
reason
identification
made
eyewitness
poor
vision
one
harbors
grudge
defendant
example
regarded
inherently
reliable
blandon
identification
even
perry
contends
distinguish
suggestive
circumstances
factors
bearing
reliability
eyewitness
evidence
perry
limitation
still
involve
trial
courts
routinely
preliminary
examinations
eyewitness
identifications
involve
element
suggestion
pp
urging
broadly
applicable
rule
perry
maintains
eyewitness
identifications
uniquely
unreliable
fallibility
eyewitness
evidence
without
taint
improper
state
conduct
warrant
due
process
rule
requiring
trial
screen
evidence
reliability
allowing
jury
assess
creditworthiness
unwillingness
adopt
rule
rests
large
part
recognition
jury
judge
traditionally
determines
reliability
evidence
also
takes
account
safeguards
built
adversary
system
caution
juries
placing
undue
weight
eyewitness
testimony
questionable
reliability
protections
include
defendant
sixth
amendment
rights
counsel
confront
eyewitness
instructions
warning
juries
take
care
appraising
identification
evidence
state
federal
rules
evidence
permitting
trial
judges
exclude
relevant
evidence
probative
value
substantially
outweighed
prejudicial
impact
potential
misleading
jury
many
safeguards
availed
perry
defense
given
safeguards
generally
applicable
criminal
trials
introduction
blandon
eyewitness
testimony
without
preliminary
judicial
assessment
reliability
render
perry
trial
fundamentally
unfair
pp
affirmed
ginsburg
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
kennedy
thomas
breyer
alito
kagan
joined
thomas
filed
concurring
opinion
sotomayor
filed
dissenting
opinion
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
barion
perry
petitioner
new
hampshire
writ
certiorari
new
hampshire
january
justice
ginsburg
delivered
opinion
system
justice
fair
trial
persons
charged
criminal
offenses
secured
sixth
amendment
guarantees
defendants
right
counsel
compulsory
process
obtain
defense
witnesses
opportunity
witnesses
prosecution
safeguards
apart
admission
evidence
state
trials
ordinarily
governed
state
law
reliability
relevant
testimony
typically
falls
within
province
jury
determine
recognized
addition
due
process
check
admission
eyewitness
identification
applicable
police
arranged
suggestive
circumstances
leading
witness
identify
particular
person
perpetrator
crime
identification
infected
improper
police
influence
case
law
holds
automatically
excluded
instead
trial
judge
must
screen
evidence
reliability
pretrial
substantial
likelihood
irreparable
misidentification
simmons
judge
must
disallow
presentation
evidence
trial
indicia
reliability
strong
enough
outweigh
corrupting
effect
suggestive
circumstances
identification
evidence
ordinarily
admitted
jury
ultimately
determine
worth
extended
pretrial
screening
reliability
cases
suggestive
circumstances
arranged
law
enforcement
officers
petitioner
requests
grave
risk
mistaken
identification
yield
miscarriage
decisions
however
turn
presence
state
action
aim
deter
police
rigging
identification
procedures
example
lineup
showup
photograph
array
improper
law
enforcement
activity
involved
hold
suffices
test
reliability
rights
opportunities
generally
designed
purpose
notably
presence
counsel
postindictment
lineups
vigorous
protective
rules
evidence
jury
instructions
fallibility
eyewitness
identification
requirement
guilt
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
around
august
joffre
ullon
called
nashua
new
hampshire
police
department
reported
male
trying
break
cars
parked
lot
ullon
apartment
building
officer
nicole
clay
responded
call
upon
arriving
parking
lot
clay
heard
sounded
like
metal
bat
hitting
ground
app
saw
petitioner
barion
perry
standing
two
cars
perry
walked
toward
clay
holding
two
amplifiers
hands
metal
bat
lay
ground
behind
clay
asked
perry
amplifiers
came
found
ground
perry
responded
meanwhile
ullon
wife
nubia
blandon
woke
neighbor
alex
clavijo
told
seen
someone
break
car
clavijo
immediately
went
downstairs
parking
lot
inspect
car
first
observed
one
rear
windows
shattered
inspection
discovered
speakers
amplifiers
car
stereo
missing
bat
wrench
clavijo
approached
clay
told
blandon
alert
subsequent
observations
time
another
officer
arrived
scene
clay
asked
perry
stay
parking
lot
officer
clavijo
went
talk
blandon
clay
clavijo
entered
apartment
building
took
stairs
fourth
floor
blandon
clavijo
apartments
located
met
blandon
hallway
outside
open
door
apartment
asked
describe
seen
blandon
stated
around
saw
kitchen
window
tall
man
roaming
parking
lot
looking
cars
eventually
man
circled
clavijo
car
opened
trunk
removed
large
clay
asked
blandon
specific
description
man
blandon
pointed
kitchen
window
said
person
saw
breaking
clavijo
car
standing
parking
lot
next
police
officer
perry
arrest
followed
identification
month
later
police
showed
blandon
photographic
array
included
picture
perry
asked
point
man
broken
clavijo
car
blandon
unable
identify
perry
perry
charged
new
hampshire
state
one
count
theft
unauthorized
taking
one
count
criminal
trial
moved
suppress
blandon
identification
ground
admitting
trial
violate
due
process
blandon
witnessed
amounted
showup
parking
lot
perry
asserted
guaranteed
identify
culprit
new
hampshire
superior
denied
motion
determine
whether
due
process
prohibits
introduction
identification
trial
superior
said
decisions
instruct
inquiry
first
trial
must
decide
whether
police
used
unnecessarily
suggestive
identification
procedure
must
next
consider
whether
improper
identification
procedure
tainted
resulting
identification
render
unreliable
therefore
inadmissible
ibid
citing
neil
biggers
manson
brathwaite
perry
challenge
superior
concluded
failed
step
one
blandon
identification
perry
night
crime
result
unnecessarily
suggestive
procedure
manufacture
police
app
blandon
pointed
perry
spontaneously
noted
without
inducement
police
clay
ask
blandon
whether
man
standing
parking
lot
man
blandon
seen
breaking
clavijo
car
ibid
clay
ask
blandon
move
window
observed
superior
recognized
reasons
question
accuracy
blandon
identification
parking
lot
dark
locations
perry
standing
next
police
officer
perry
man
vicinity
blandon
unable
later
pick
perry
photographic
array
ecause
police
procedures
unnecessarily
suggestive
ruled
reliability
blandon
testimony
jury
consider
ensuing
trial
blandon
clay
testified
blandon
identification
jury
found
perry
guilty
theft
guilty
criminal
mischief
appeal
perry
repeated
challenge
admissibility
blandon
identification
trial
erred
perry
contended
requiring
initial
showing
police
arranged
suggestive
identification
procedure
suggestive
circumstances
alone
perry
argued
suffice
trigger
duty
evaluate
reliability
resulting
identification
allowing
presentation
evidence
jury
new
hampshire
rejected
perry
argument
affirmed
conviction
police
employ
suggestive
identification
techniques
held
due
process
clause
require
trial
assess
reliability
identification
evidence
permitting
jury
consider
granted
certiorari
resolve
division
opinion
question
whether
due
process
clause
requires
trial
judge
conduct
preliminary
assessment
reliability
eyewitness
identification
made
suggestive
circumstances
arranged
police
ii
constitution
decisions
indicate
protects
defendant
conviction
based
evidence
questionable
reliability
prohibiting
introduction
evidence
affording
defendant
means
persuade
jury
evidence
discounted
unworthy
credit
constitutional
safeguards
available
defendants
counter
state
evidence
include
sixth
amendment
rights
counsel
gideon
wainwright
compulsory
process
taylor
illinois
confrontation
plus
witnesses
delaware
fensterer
per
curiam
apart
guarantees
recognized
state
federal
statutes
rules
ordinarily
govern
admissibility
evidence
juries
assigned
task
determining
reliability
evidence
presented
trial
see
kansas
ventris
legal
system
built
premise
province
jury
weigh
credibility
competing
evidence
extremely
unfair
admission
violates
fundamental
conceptions
justice
dowling
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
imposed
constraint
tied
due
process
clause
see
napue
illinois
due
process
prohibits
state
knowin
use
false
evidence
use
violates
concept
ordered
contending
due
process
clause
implicated
perry
relies
series
decisions
involving
identification
procedures
stovall
denno
first
decisions
witness
identified
defendant
assailant
police
officers
brought
defendant
witness
hospital
room
time
witness
made
identification
defendant
room
handcuffed
surrounded
police
officers
ibid
although
showup
undeniably
suggestive
held
due
process
violation
occurred
crucial
decision
procedure
necessity
witness
person
identify
exonerate
defendant
witness
leave
hospital
room
uncertain
whether
live
identify
defendant
neutral
circumstances
ibid
year
later
simmons
addressed
due
process
challenge
police
use
photographic
array
witness
identifies
defendant
photo
lineup
ruled
identification
suppressed
photographic
identification
procedure
unnecessarily
suggestive
give
rise
substantial
likelihood
irreparable
misidentification
satisfied
photo
array
used
federal
bureau
investigation
agents
simmons
necessary
unlikely
led
mistaken
identification
rejected
defendant
due
process
challenge
admission
identification
contrast
held
foster
california
due
process
required
exclusion
eyewitness
identification
obtained
procedures
made
inevitable
witness
identify
defendant
synthesizing
previous
decisions
set
forth
neil
biggers
reiterated
manson
brathwaite
approach
appropriately
used
determine
whether
due
process
clause
requires
suppression
eyewitness
identification
tainted
police
arrangement
emphasized
first
due
process
concerns
arise
law
enforcement
officers
use
identification
procedure
suggestive
unnecessary
biggers
even
police
use
procedure
next
said
suppression
resulting
identification
inevitable
consequence
brathwaite
biggers
rule
requiring
automatic
exclusion
reasoned
far
kee
evidence
jury
reliable
relevant
may
result
occasion
guilty
going
free
brathwaite
see
identification
reliable
despite
unnecessarily
suggestive
police
identification
procedure
automatic
exclusion
draconian
sanction
one
may
frustrate
rather
promote
justice
instead
mandating
per
se
exclusionary
rule
held
due
process
clause
requires
courts
assess
basis
whether
improper
police
conduct
created
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
biggers
see
brathwaite
eliability
eyewitness
identification
linchpin
evaluation
stated
brathwaite
indicators
witness
ability
make
accurate
identification
outweighed
corrupting
effect
law
enforcement
suggestion
identification
suppressed
otherwise
evidence
admissible
respects
submitted
applying
totality
circumstances
approach
held
biggers
law
enforcement
use
unnecessarily
suggestive
showup
require
suppression
victim
identification
assailant
notwithstanding
improper
procedure
victim
identification
reliable
saw
assailant
considerable
period
time
adequate
light
provided
police
detailed
description
attacker
long
showup
doubt
defendant
person
seen
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
similarly
concluded
brathwaite
police
use
unnecessarily
suggestive
photo
array
require
exclusion
resulting
identification
witness
undercover
police
officer
viewed
defendant
good
light
several
minutes
provided
thorough
description
suspect
certain
identification
hence
indicators
witness
ability
make
accurate
identification
hardly
outweighed
corrupting
effect
challenged
identification
perry
concedes
contrast
every
case
stovall
line
law
enforcement
officials
arrange
suggestive
circumstances
surrounding
blandon
identification
see
brief
petitioner
tr
oral
arg
counsel
perry
allege
manipulation
intentional
orchestration
contends
however
mere
happenstance
stovall
cases
involved
improper
police
action
rationale
underlying
decisions
perry
asserts
supports
rule
requiring
trial
judges
prescreen
eyewitness
evidence
reliability
time
identification
made
suggestive
circumstances
disagree
perry
argument
depends
large
part
statement
brathwaite
reliability
linchpin
determining
admissibility
identification
testimony
reliability
linchpin
admissibility
due
process
clause
perry
maintains
make
difference
whether
law
enforcement
responsible
creating
suggestive
circumstances
marred
identification
perry
removed
statement
brathwaite
mooring
thereby
attributes
statement
meaning
fair
reading
opinion
bear
explained
supra
brathwaite
reference
reliability
appears
portion
opinion
concerning
appropriate
remedy
police
use
unnecessarily
suggestive
identification
procedure
adopted
judicial
screen
reliability
course
preferable
per
se
rule
requiring
exclusion
identification
evidence
whenever
law
enforcement
officers
employ
improper
procedure
due
process
check
reliability
brathwaite
made
plain
comes
play
defendant
establishes
improper
police
conduct
purpose
check
noted
avoid
depriving
jury
identification
evidence
reliable
notwithstanding
improper
police
conduct
perry
contention
improper
police
action
essential
reliability
check
brathwaite
required
echoed
dissent
post
ignore
key
premise
brathwaite
decision
primary
aim
excluding
identification
evidence
obtained
unnecessarily
suggestive
circumstances
said
deter
law
enforcement
use
improper
lineups
showups
photo
arrays
first
place
see
alerted
prospect
identification
evidence
improperly
obtained
may
excluded
reasoned
police
officers
guard
unnecessarily
suggestive
procedures
ibid
deterrence
rationale
inapposite
cases
like
perry
police
engaged
improper
conduct
coleman
alabama
another
decision
stovall
line
similarly
shows
linked
due
process
check
suspicion
eyewitness
testimony
generally
improper
police
arrangement
circumstances
surrounding
identification
defendants
coleman
contended
witness
identifications
violated
due
process
pretrial
stationhouse
lineup
unduly
prejudicial
conducive
irreparable
misidentification
fatally
taint
later
identifications
plurality
opinion
rejected
argument
plurality
opinion
black
concurring
burger
dissenting
stewart
dissenting
due
process
violation
occurred
plurality
explained
nothing
police
said
prompted
witness
virtually
spontaneous
identification
defendants
true
coleman
person
lineup
wearing
hat
plurality
noted
nothing
record
show
ed
required
ibid
see
also
colorado
connelly
crucial
element
police
overreaching
missing
admissibility
allegedly
unreliable
confession
matter
governed
evidentiary
laws
forum
due
process
perry
dissent
place
significant
weight
wade
describing
decision
anchored
improper
police
conduct
see
brief
petitioner
post
fact
risk
police
rigging
danger
responded
wade
recognized
defendant
right
counsel
postindictment
identification
procedures
confrontation
compelled
state
accused
victim
witnesses
began
peculiarly
riddled
innumerable
dangers
variable
factors
might
seriously
even
crucially
derogate
fair
trial
emphasis
added
major
factor
contributing
high
incidence
miscarriage
justice
mistaken
identification
continued
degree
suggestion
inherent
manner
prosecution
presents
suspect
witnesses
pretrial
identification
ibid
emphasis
added
illustrate
improper
suggestion
concerned
pointed
lineups
lineup
suspect
known
identifying
witness
participants
lineup
grossly
dissimilar
appearance
suspect
suspect
required
wear
distinctive
clothing
culprit
allegedly
wore
witness
told
police
caught
culprit
defendant
brought
witness
alone
viewed
jail
suspect
pointed
lineup
participants
lineup
asked
try
article
clothing
fits
suspect
footnotes
omitted
beyond
genuine
debate
prevention
unfair
police
practices
prompted
extend
defendant
right
counsel
cover
postindictment
lineups
showups
perry
argument
reiterated
dissent
thus
lacks
support
case
law
cites
moreover
position
open
door
judicial
preview
banner
due
process
eyewitness
identifications
external
suggestion
hardly
factor
casts
doubt
trustworthiness
eyewitness
testimony
one
perry
amici
points
many
factors
bear
likelihood
misidentification
post
example
passage
time
exposure
identification
defendant
whether
witness
stress
first
encountered
suspect
much
time
witness
observe
suspect
far
witness
suspect
whether
suspect
carried
weapon
race
suspect
witness
brief
american
psychological
association
amicus
curiae
reason
identification
made
eyewitness
poor
vision
example
one
harbors
grudge
defendant
regarded
inherently
reliable
less
threat
fairness
trial
post
identification
blandon
made
case
embrace
perry
view
thus
entail
vast
enlargement
reach
due
process
constraint
admission
evidence
perry
maintains
limit
due
process
check
proposes
identifications
made
suggestive
circumstances
tr
oral
arg
even
rationally
distinguish
suggestiveness
factors
bearing
reliability
eyewitness
evidence
perry
limitation
still
involve
trial
courts
routinely
preliminary
examinations
eyewitness
identifications
involve
element
suggestion
indeed
identifications
identifications
volunteered
witnesses
also
likely
involve
suggestive
circumstances
example
suppose
witness
identifies
defendant
police
officers
seeing
photograph
defendant
press
captioned
theft
suspect
hearing
radio
report
implicating
defendant
crime
suppose
witness
knew
defendant
ran
wrong
crowd
saw
day
vicinity
crime
circumstances
might
suggested
witness
defendant
person
witness
observed
committing
crime
urging
broadly
applicable
due
process
check
eyewitness
identifications
perry
maintains
eyewitness
identifications
uniquely
unreliable
form
evidence
see
brief
petitioner
citing
studies
showing
eyewitness
misidentifications
leading
cause
wrongful
convictions
brief
american
psychological
association
amicus
curiae
describing
research
indicating
many
one
three
eyewitness
identifications
inaccurate
see
also
post
doubt
either
importance
fallibility
eyewitness
identifications
indeed
recognizing
defendants
constitutional
right
counsel
postindictment
police
lineups
observed
annals
criminal
law
rife
instances
mistaken
identification
wade
concluded
contexts
however
potential
unreliability
type
evidence
alone
render
introduction
defendant
trial
fundamentally
unfair
see
ventris
declining
craft
broa
exclusionary
rule
uncorroborated
statements
obtained
jailhouse
snitches
even
though
rewarded
informant
testimony
may
inherently
untrustworthy
dowling
rejecting
argument
introduction
evidence
concerning
acquitted
conduct
fundamentally
unfair
evidence
inherently
unreliable
reach
similar
conclusion
fallibility
eyewitness
evidence
without
taint
improper
state
conduct
warrant
due
process
rule
requiring
trial
screen
evidence
reliability
allowing
jury
assess
creditworthiness
unwillingness
enlarge
domain
due
process
perry
dissent
urge
rests
large
part
recognition
jury
judge
traditionally
determines
reliability
evidence
see
supra
also
take
account
safeguards
built
adversary
system
caution
juries
placing
undue
weight
eyewitness
testimony
questionable
reliability
protections
include
defendant
sixth
amendment
right
confront
eyewitness
see
maryland
craig
central
concern
confrontation
clause
ensure
reliability
evidence
criminal
another
defendant
right
effective
assistance
attorney
expose
flaws
eyewitness
testimony
focus
jury
attention
fallibility
testimony
opening
closing
arguments
jury
instructions
many
federal
state
courts
likewise
warn
jury
take
care
appraising
identification
evidence
see
telfaire
cadc
per
curiam
circuit
model
jury
instructions
identification
witness
may
influenced
circumstances
defendant
presented
identification
scrutinize
identification
great
see
also
ventris
citing
jury
instructions
informed
jurors
unreliability
uncorroborated
testimony
reason
resist
ban
testimony
dowling
constitutional
requirement
government
prove
defendant
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
also
impedes
convictions
based
dubious
identification
evidence
state
federal
rules
evidence
moreover
permit
trial
judges
exclude
relevant
evidence
probative
value
substantially
outweighed
prejudicial
impact
potential
misleading
jury
see
fed
rule
evid
rule
evid
see
also
tr
oral
arg
inquiring
whether
standard
perry
seeks
differs
materially
one
set
rule
appropriate
cases
also
permit
defendants
present
expert
testimony
hazards
eyewitness
identification
evidence
see
state
clopten
ut
expect
cases
involving
eyewitness
identification
strangers
trial
courts
routinely
admit
expert
testimony
dangers
evidence
many
safeguards
noted
work
perry
trial
opening
statement
perry
attorney
cautioned
jury
vulnerability
blandon
identification
app
blandon
eyewitness
state
needs
believe
ca
pick
perry
photo
array
carefully
really
see
going
well
really
see
blandon
officer
clay
perry
attorney
constantly
brought
weaknesses
blandon
identification
highlighted
significant
distance
blandon
window
parking
lot
lateness
hour
van
partly
obstructed
blandon
view
blandon
concession
scared
really
pay
attention
perry
wearing
blandon
inability
describe
perry
facial
features
identifying
marks
blandon
failure
pick
perry
photo
array
perry
position
next
uniformed
police
officer
moment
blandon
made
identification
perry
counsel
reminded
jury
frailties
summation
blandon
able
tell
much
saw
pick
perry
lineup
photo
array
blandon
said
hat
guy
police
officer
circling
think
context
guns
uniforms
powerful
powerful
context
closing
arguments
trial
read
jury
lengthy
instruction
identification
testimony
factors
jury
consider
evaluating
also
instructed
jury
defendant
guilt
must
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
specifically
cautioned
one
things
state
must
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
identification
defendant
person
committed
offense
given
safeguards
generally
applicable
criminal
trials
protections
availed
defense
perry
case
hold
introduction
blandon
eyewitness
testimony
without
preliminary
judicial
assessment
reliability
render
perry
trial
fundamentally
unfair
foregoing
reasons
agree
new
hampshire
courts
appraisal
decisions
see
supra
finding
convincing
reason
alter
precedent
hold
due
process
clause
require
preliminary
judicial
inquiry
reliability
eyewitness
identification
identification
procured
unnecessarily
suggestive
circumstances
arranged
law
enforcement
accordingly
judgment
new
hampshire
affirmed
thomas
concurring
barion
perry
petitioner
new
hampshire
writ
certiorari
new
hampshire
january
justice
thomas
concurring
correctly
concludes
precedents
establish
due
process
right
pretrial
exclusion
unreliable
eyewitness
identification
identification
results
police
suggestion
therefore
join
opinion
write
separately
extend
stovall
denno
progeny
even
reasoning
opinions
applied
case
stovall
line
cases
premised
substantive
due
process
right
fundamental
fairness
see
concluding
whether
suggestive
identification
resulted
unfairness
infringed
defendant
right
due
process
law
open
persons
allege
prove
manson
brathwaite
standard
fairness
required
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
view
cases
wrongly
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
secret
repository
substantive
guarantees
bmw
north
america
gore
scalia
joined
thomas
dissenting
see
also
mcdonald
chicago
thomas
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
slip
notion
constitutional
provision
guarantees
person
deprived
life
liberty
property
define
substance
rights
strains
credulity
accordingly
limit
suggestive
eyewitness
identification
cases
precise
circumstances
involved
sotomayor
dissenting
barion
perry
petitioner
new
hampshire
writ
certiorari
new
hampshire
january
justice
sotomayor
dissenting
long
recognized
eyewitness
identifications
unique
confluence
features
unreliability
susceptibility
suggestion
powerful
impact
jury
resistance
ordinary
tests
adversarial
process
undermine
fairness
trial
cases
thus
establish
clear
rule
admission
trial
eyewitness
identifications
derived
suggestive
circumstances
pose
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
violates
due
process
today
announces
rule
even
com
play
unless
suggestive
circumstances
improperly
ante
due
process
concern
however
arises
act
suggestion
rather
corrosive
effects
suggestion
reliability
resulting
identification
rendering
protection
contingent
improper
police
arrangement
suggestive
circumstances
effectively
grafts
mens
rea
inquiry
onto
rule
holding
enshrines
murky
distinction
suggestive
confrontations
intentionally
orchestrated
police
inadvertently
caused
police
actions
sow
confusion
ignores
precedents
acute
sensitivity
hazards
intentional
unintentional
suggestion
alike
unmoors
rule
interest
protects
inviting
arbitrary
results
recasts
driving
force
decisions
interest
police
deterrence
rather
reliability
see
warrant
declining
assess
circumstances
case
ordinary
approach
respectfully
driving
force
behind
wade
gilbert
california
stovall
denno
concern
problems
eyewitness
identification
specifically
concern
jury
hear
eyewitness
testimony
unless
evidence
aspects
reliability
manson
brathwaite
pointed
number
miscarriage
justice
mistaken
identification
annals
criminal
law
wade
warned
vagaries
nature
eyewitness
identifications
ibid
singled
major
factor
contributing
proverbial
unreliability
suggestibility
inherent
context
pretrial
identification
precedents
make
distinction
intentional
unintentional
suggestion
contrary
explicitly
state
uggestion
created
intentionally
unintentionally
many
subtle
ways
rather
equate
suggestive
conduct
misconduct
specifically
disavowed
assumption
suggestive
influences
may
result
police
procedures
intentionally
designed
prejudice
accused
see
also
noting
grave
potential
prejudice
intentional
pretrial
lineup
describing
lack
lineup
regulations
addressing
risks
abuse
unintentional
suggestion
persons
conduct
identification
procedure
may
suggest
intentionally
unintentionally
expect
witness
identify
accused
moore
illinois
implication
even
police
acting
best
intentions
inadvertently
signal
man
wade
see
also
kirby
illinois
always
necessary
pretrial
confrontation
wade
noted
potential
improper
influence
pretrial
confrontations
illustrated
circumstances
present
case
highlighted
lineup
procedure
rather
preprocedure
encounter
two
witnesses
later
identified
wade
lineup
seen
wade
outside
await
ing
assembly
lineup
wade
standing
hallway
happened
observable
witnesses
open
door
ibid
one
witness
saw
wade
within
sight
fbi
agent
saw
custody
agent
ibid
underscoring
hazards
circumstances
made
mention
whether
encounter
arranged
indeed
facts
suggest
generally
precedents
focus
act
suggestion
suggestion
corrupting
effect
reliability
brathwaite
eyewitness
evidence
derived
suggestive
circumstances
explained
uniquely
resistant
ordinary
tests
adversary
process
eyewitness
made
identification
often
becomes
convinced
accuracy
regardless
initial
misidentification
comes
witness
thereafter
apt
retain
memory
image
photograph
rather
person
actually
seen
reducing
trustworthiness
subsequent
courtroom
identification
simmons
emphasis
added
see
also
wade
witness
likely
recant
suggestion
bolsters
confidence
trial
eyewitness
artificially
inflated
confidence
identification
accuracy
complicates
jury
task
assessing
witness
credibility
reliability
also
impairs
defendant
ability
attack
eyewitness
credibility
stovall
turn
jeopardizes
defendant
basic
right
subject
accuser
meaningful
see
wade
viewed
absolute
assurance
accuracy
reliability
many
variables
pitfalls
exist
end
result
suggestion
whether
intentional
unintentional
fortify
testimony
bearing
directly
guilt
juries
find
extremely
convincing
hesitant
discredit
see
pretrial
proceedings
results
might
well
settle
accused
fate
reduce
trial
mere
formality
gilbert
witness
testimony
lineup
identification
enhance
impact
identification
jury
consistent
focus
reliability
declined
adopt
per
se
rule
excluding
suggestive
identifications
instead
reliability
linchpin
deciding
admissibility
brathwaite
explained
suggestive
identification
procedure
intrude
upon
constitutionally
protected
see
also
neil
biggers
rejecting
proposition
unnecessary
suggestiveness
alone
requires
exclusion
evidence
suggestive
confrontations
disapproved
increase
likelihood
misidentification
likelihood
misidentification
violates
defendant
right
due
process
see
also
ex
rel
kirby
sturges
stevens
due
process
clause
applies
proceedings
result
deprivation
life
liberty
property
constitutional
violation
results
showup
occurs
courtroom
police
station
short
stovall
due
process
right
protects
evidentiary
interest
brathwaite
protect
evidentiary
interest
applied
inquiry
first
defendant
burden
showing
eyewitness
identification
derived
impermissibly
suggestive
simmons
second
defendant
meets
burden
courts
consider
whether
identification
reliable
totality
circumstances
step
entails
considering
witness
opportunity
view
perpetrator
degree
attention
accuracy
description
level
certainty
time
crime
pretrial
confrontation
weighing
factors
corrupting
effect
suggestive
identification
brathwaite
identifications
admissible
standard
fairness
required
due
process
clause
however
demands
subset
unreliable
identifications
carrying
substantial
likelihood
excluded
biggers
ii
majority
today
creates
novel
significant
limitation
longstanding
rule
eyewitness
identifications
impermissibly
suggestive
pose
substantial
likelihood
unreliable
identification
deemed
inadmissible
trial
suggestive
circumstances
ante
absent
improper
police
arrangement
improper
police
conduct
rigging
majority
holds
inquiry
even
com
play
ante
agree
majority
simply
hold
eyewitness
identification
must
product
police
action
trigger
ordinary
inquiry
rather
majority
maintains
suggestive
circumstances
giving
rise
identification
must
police
rigg
ed
ante
terms
connote
degree
intentional
orchestration
manipulation
see
brief
respondent
indication
police
deliberately
tried
manipulate
evidence
brief
amicus
curiae
one
deliberately
arranged
circumstances
obtain
identification
majority
exempts
eyewitness
identifications
derived
suggestive
circumstances
however
suggestive
however
unreliable
due
process
check
majority
thus
appears
graft
mens
rea
requirement
onto
existing
case
illustrates
police
intent
paramount
acknowledges
perry
alleges
accidental
showup
brief
petitioner
emphasis
added
see
ante
scene
crime
standing
next
police
officer
majority
fact
police
intend
showup
even
inadvertently
caused
course
police
procedure
ends
inquiry
police
questioning
eyewitness
blandon
perpetrator
identity
intentionally
detaining
perry
parking
lot
intended
blandon
identify
perpetrator
window
presumably
majority
view
police
asked
blandon
move
window
identify
perpetrator
made
difference
see
tr
oral
arg
note
however
majority
leaves
required
inquiry
less
clear
parts
opinion
suggests
police
must
arrange
identification
procedure
regardless
whether
inten
arranged
procedure
suggestive
ante
see
also
ante
elsewhere
indicates
police
must
arrange
suggestive
lead
witness
identify
accused
see
ante
still
elsewhere
refers
police
conduct
ante
connoting
bad
faith
police
arrangement
relate
procedure
suggestiveness
relates
procedure
suggestive
preprocedure
encounters
longer
raise
concerns
police
need
inten
arranged
procedure
suggestive
ante
makes
police
action
improper
mean
unintentional
police
suggestiveness
lineup
impermissibly
suggestive
majority
runs
headlong
wade
yes
basis
deterrence
distinguish
unintentional
police
suggestiveness
accidental
confrontation
inquiry
sow
needless
police
called
perry
blandon
police
station
interviews
blandon
saw
perry
questioned
sufficiently
improper
police
arrangement
perry
voluntarily
come
police
station
change
result
today
opinion
renders
applicability
ordinary
inquiry
contingent
murky
exercise
whereas
inquiry
focuses
overall
reliability
account
spontaneity
witness
identification
degree
police
manipulation
circumstances
today
opinion
forecloses
assessment
establishing
new
inflexible
step
zero
majority
regards
limitation
rule
compelled
precedent
chief
rationale
ante
none
prior
cases
involved
situations
police
arrange
suggestive
circumstances
ante
see
also
ante
necessarily
true
given
seemingly
unintentional
encounter
highlighted
wade
even
true
unsurprising
vast
majority
eyewitness
identifications
state
uses
criminal
prosecutions
obtained
lineup
showup
photograph
displays
arranged
police
precedents
reflect
practical
reality
also
beside
point
due
process
concerns
predicated
source
suggestiveness
rather
likelihood
misidentification
violates
defendant
right
due
process
biggers
concerned
suggestion
corrupting
effect
identification
reliability
brathwaite
accordingly
whether
police
created
suggestive
circumstances
intentionally
inadvertently
resulting
identification
raises
due
process
concerns
less
likely
misidentify
perpetrator
less
powerful
jury
defendant
less
equipped
challenge
identification
prejudiced
trial
inquiry
thus
untethers
doctrine
designed
protect
inviting
arbitrary
results
indeed
majority
approach
lies
tension
precedents
whereas
previously
disclaimed
crabbed
view
suggestiveness
result
police
procedures
intentionally
designed
prejudice
wade
majority
focus
police
rigging
improper
conduct
revive
whereas
precedents
sensitive
intentional
unintentional
suggestiveness
alike
see
supra
today
decision
narrows
concern
intentionally
orchestrated
suggestive
confrontations
described
evil
avoided
likelihood
misidentification
biggers
today
decision
however
means
even
primary
evil
apex
need
avoid
long
suggestive
circumstances
stem
improper
police
arrangement
majority
gives
several
additional
reasons
applying
due
process
rule
beyond
improperly
circumstances
unwarranted
view
none
withstands
close
inspection
first
majority
insists
precedents
aim
deter
police
rigging
identification
procedures
rule
limited
applications
advance
primary
aim
key
premise
ante
citing
brathwaite
mischaracterizes
cases
discussed
deterrence
brathwaite
brathwaite
challenged
inquiry
lacking
deterrence
value
brathwaite
argued
deterrence
per
se
rule
excluding
suggestive
identifications
said
rule
probes
reliability
suggestive
identifications
totality
circumstances
expected
significant
deterrent
impact
rebutted
brathwaite
criticism
language
majority
wrenches
context
upon
summarizing
brathwaite
argument
acknowledged
several
interests
considered
ibid
compared
two
rules
interest
first
noted
driving
force
behind
wade
companion
cases
concern
jury
hear
eyewitness
testimony
unless
evidence
aspects
reliability
found
approaches
responsive
concern
per
se
rule
go
far
suppressing
reliable
evidence
noted
second
factor
deterrence
conceding
per
se
rule
significant
deterrent
effect
noting
rule
also
influence
police
behavior
finally
noted
third
factor
effect
administration
justice
describing
per
se
rule
serious
drawbacks
front
ibid
list
primary
aim
ringing
endorsement
primacy
deterrence
simply
underscored
responding
brathwaite
rule
without
deterrence
benefits
contrary
clarified
deterrence
subsidiary
concern
reliability
driving
force
doctrine
stretch
claim
rule
apply
wherever
deterrence
rationale
inapposite
ante
second
majority
coleman
alabama
held
due
process
violation
occurred
nothing
police
said
identification
shows
rule
linked
improper
police
arrangement
ante
misreads
decision
coleman
petitioners
challenged
witness
identification
trial
grounds
tainted
suggestive
pretrial
lineup
held
due
process
violation
occurred
identification
entirely
based
upon
observations
time
assault
induced
conduct
lineup
thus
said
stem
identification
procedure
impermissibly
suggestive
give
rise
substantial
likelihood
irreparable
misidentification
plurality
opinion
dismissed
asserted
suggestive
influences
bearing
identification
petitioners
claimed
police
intimated
witness
attackers
lineup
found
record
devoid
evidence
anything
police
said
induced
identification
petitioners
claimed
alone
made
say
certain
words
found
witness
identified
petitioners
either
said
anything
one
petitioner
claimed
singled
wear
hat
found
witness
identification
id
appear
based
fact
remembered
attacker
worn
hat
ibid
thus
far
indicating
improper
police
conduct
prerequisite
coleman
merely
held
influence
witness
fact
concluding
lineup
impermissibly
suggestive
give
rise
substantial
likelihood
irreparable
misidentification
coleman
indicates
inquiry
truncated
threshold
absence
police
misconduct
third
majority
emphasizes
rely
jury
determine
reliability
evidence
see
ante
cases
rooted
assumption
eyewitness
identifications
upend
ordinary
expectation
province
jury
weigh
credibility
competing
witnesses
kansas
ventris
noted
jurors
find
eyewitness
evidence
unusually
powerful
ability
assess
credibility
hindered
witness
false
confidence
accuracy
identification
disability
way
intent
behind
suggestive
circumstances
majority
appeals
protecting
jury
domain
moreover
appeared
dissent
dissent
see
foster
california
black
dissenting
jury
sole
tribunal
weigh
determine
facts
must
allowed
hear
eyewitnesses
decide
whether
recognize
truth
simmons
black
concurring
part
dissenting
part
weight
evidence
question
jury
majority
assurance
constitutional
protections
like
sixth
amendment
rights
compulsory
process
confrontation
suffice
expose
unreliable
identifications
compare
ante
foster
black
dissenting
constitution
sets
standards
unfairness
criminal
trials
including
sixth
amendment
right
compulsory
process
right
confront
witnesses
majority
appeal
leave
reliability
rules
evidence
compare
ante
foster
black
dissenting
evidence
designed
interests
fair
stovall
black
dissenting
result
put
constitutional
mould
rule
evidence
arguments
prevail
prevail
fourth
majority
suggests
applying
rule
beyond
suggestive
circumstances
entail
heavy
practical
burden
requiring
courts
engage
preliminary
judicial
inquiry
eyewitness
identifications
ante
inaccurate
burden
showing
impermissibly
suggestive
circumstances
defendant
objection
falls
defendant
raise
implicit
majority
reassurance
perry
may
resort
rules
evidence
lieu
due
process
precedents
trial
courts
entertaining
defendants
objections
pretrial
trial
unreliable
eyewitness
evidence
event
relevant
question
standard
admissibility
governing
objections
see
reason
water
standard
equally
suggestive
unreliable
identification
simply
suggestive
confrontation
unplanned
bears
reminding
moreover
set
high
bar
suppression
vast
majority
eyewitnesses
proceed
testify
jury
date
foster
case
found
due
process
violation
flood
claims
four
federal
circuits
seen
basis
distinction
precedents
long
indicated
due
process
scrutiny
applies
suggestive
identification
procedures
see
dunnigan
keane
bouthot
thigpen
cory
see
also
green
loggins
today
decision
nonetheless
precludes
even
possibility
unintended
confrontation
meet
bar
mandating
summary
dismissal
every
claim
threshold
finally
majority
questions
rationally
distinguish
suggestiveness
factors
bearing
reliability
eyewitness
evidence
poor
vision
prior
grudge
ante
broadly
distinguish
eyewitness
evidence
kinds
arguably
unreliable
evidence
ante
precedents
however
emphasized
number
instances
records
english
miscarriage
justice
mistaken
identification
wade
observed
influence
improper
suggestion
upon
identifying
witnesses
probably
accounts
miscarriages
justice
single
factor
majority
points
type
evidence
shares
rare
confluence
characteristics
makes
eyewitness
evidence
unique
threat
fairness
trial
jailhouse
informants
cf
ante
unreliable
may
similarly
resistant
traditional
tools
adversarial
process
anything
met
particular
skepticism
juries
one
thing
passage
time
cast
doubt
empirical
premises
precedents
opposite
happened
vast
body
scientific
literature
reinforced
every
concern
precedents
articulated
nearly
ago
though
merits
barely
parenthetical
mention
majority
opinion
ante
past
three
decades
two
thousand
studies
related
eyewitness
identification
published
one
state
recently
appointed
special
master
conduct
exhaustive
survey
current
state
scientific
evidence
concluded
research
extensive
represents
standard
terms
applicability
social
science
research
law
state
henderson
experimental
methods
findings
tested
retested
subjected
scientific
scrutiny
journals
evaluated
lens
replicated
times
settings
ibid
see
also
schmechel
easterly
loftus
beyond
ken
testing
jurors
understanding
eyewitness
reliability
evidence
jurimetrics
noting
nearly
unanimous
consensus
among
researchers
eyewitness
reliability
field
core
findings
empirical
evidence
demonstrates
eyewitness
misidentification
single
greatest
cause
wrongful
convictions
country
researchers
found
staggering
first
convictions
overturned
due
dna
evidence
since
involved
eyewitness
study
study
demonstrates
eyewitness
recollections
highly
susceptible
distortion
postevent
information
social
cues
jurors
routinely
overestimate
accuracy
eyewitness
identifications
jurors
place
greatest
weight
eyewitness
confidence
assessing
even
though
confidence
poor
gauge
accuracy
suggestiveness
stem
sources
beyond
majority
today
adopts
artificially
narrow
conception
dangers
suggestive
identifications
time
concerns
deepened
iii
many
reasons
perry
particular
situation
might
violate
due
process
trial
found
circumstances
surrounding
blandon
identification
rise
impermissibly
suggestive
level
clear
moreover
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
given
blandon
lack
equivocation
scene
short
time
crime
confrontation
fairly
well
lit
parking
lot
app
new
hampshire
however
never
made
findings
either
point
majority
decision
today
never
opinion
today
renders
defendant
due
process
protection
contingent
whether
suggestive
circumstances
giving
rise
eyewitness
identification
stem
improper
police
arrangement
view
lies
tension
precedents
holistic
conception
dangers
suggestion
untethered
evidentiary
interest
due
process
right
protects
view
ordinary
inquiry
apply
whether
police
created
suggestive
circumstances
intentionally
inadvertently
new
hampshire
truncated
inquiry
threshold
vacate
judgment
remand
proper
analysis
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
dissent
appears
urge
suggestive
circumstances
raise
due
process
concerns
warranting
pretrial
ruling
see
post
neither
perry
dissent
however
points
single
case
required
pretrial
screening
absent
identification
procedure
understandably
cases
instead
dissent
surveys
decisions
heedless
police
arrangement
underlies
every
one
inventing
longstanding
rule
post
never
existed
dissent
suggests
imposing
mens
rea
requirement
post
otherwise
altering
precedent
way
case
law
makes
clear
triggers
due
process
concerns
police
use
unnecessarily
suggestive
identification
procedure
whether
intended
arranged
procedure
suggestive
box
clay
found
ground
near
first
encountered
perry
contained
speakers
app
theft
charge
based
taking
items
clavijo
car
criminal
mischief
count
founded
shattering
clavijo
car
window
compare
bouthot
due
process
requires
federal
courts
scrutinize
suggestive
identification
procedures
orchestrated
police
dunnigan
keane
thigpen
cory
kimberlin
due
process
check
required
cases
involving
improper
state
action
zeiler
state
addison
state
reid
state
nordstrom
semple
state
harris
state
ind
state
pailon
commonwealth
mass
state
brown
ohio
wilson
commonwealth
among
factors
considered
evaluating
witness
ability
make
accurate
identification
listed
opportunity
witness
view
criminal
time
crime
witness
degree
attention
accuracy
prior
description
criminal
level
certainty
demonstrated
confrontation
time
crime
confrontation
manson
brathwaite
citing
neil
biggers
description
question
presented
brathwaite
assumes
improper
state
action
occurred
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
compe
exclusion
state
criminal
trial
apart
consideration
reliability
pretrial
identification
evidence
obtained
police
procedure
suggestive
unnecessary
see
model
crim
jury
instr
holley
pattern
crim
jury
instr
pattern
crim
jury
instr
fed
crim
jury
instr
model
crim
jury
instr
district
courts
model
crim
jury
instr
crim
pattern
jury
instr
pattern
jury
instr
crim
cases
spec
instr
rev
jury
ed
judicial
council
cal
crim
jury
instr
summer
crim
jury
instr
ga
suggested
pattern
jury
instr
crim
cases
ed
pattern
jury
supp
pattern
md
crim
jury
instr
commentary
ed
supp
mass
crim
model
jury
instr
jury
instr
guides
supp
crim
jury
instr
crim
jury
instr
identification
one
witness
identification
witness
plus
ed
okla
uniform
jury
supp
pa
suggested
standard
crim
jury
instr
ed
pattern
jury
ed
utah
model
jury
instr
ed
model
instructions
crim
jury
instr
comm
nos
crim
jury
instr
ed
footnotes
facts
case
involve
police
action
reach
question
whether
due
process
triggered
situations
involving
police
action
whatsoever
wade
held
dangers
pretrial
identification
procedures
necessitated
right
counsel
day
stovall
held
defendant
ineligible
wade
rule
still
entitled
challenge
confrontation
due
process
violation
two
companion
cases
advancing
interrelated
rules
avoid
unfairness
trial
resulting
suggestive
pretrial
confrontations
wade
exposition
dangers
suggestiveness
informs
contexts
see
manson
brathwaite
wade
companion
cases
reflect
concern
jury
hear
eyewitness
testimony
unless
evidence
aspects
reliability
precedents
refer
impermissibly
unnecessarily
unduly
suggestive
circumstances
interchangeably
see
brathwaite
impermissibly
unnecessarily
neil
biggers
impermissibly
unnecessarily
coleman
alabama
unduly
impermissibly
simmons
unduly
impermissibly
circuits
followed
suit
thigpen
cory
unduly
green
loggins
unnecessarily
impermissibly
reinforce
focus
act
suggestion
whether
suggestiveness
rises
level
undermines
reliability
police
machinations
heighten
likelihood
misidentification
prerequisite
finding
confrontation
impermissibly
suggestive
give
rise
substantial
likelihood
misidentification
simmons
majority
denies
imposed
mens
rea
requirement
see
ante
confining
due
process
concerns
identification
procedures
done
majority
acknowledges
whether
police
intended
arranged
procedure
suggestive
irrelevant
precedents
still
places
dispositive
weight
whether
police
intended
procedure
state
henderson
see
also
benn
state
dubose
dept
justice
office
justice
programs
connors
lundregan
miller
mcewen
convicted
juries
exonerated
science
case
studies
use
dna
evidence
establish
innocence
trial
cutler
penrod
mistaken
identification
eyewitness
psychology
law
wells
good
identified
suspect
feedback
eyewitnesses
distorts
reports
witnessing
experience
applied
psychology
garrett
convicting
innocent
criminal
prosecutions
go
wrong
see
also
innocence
project
facts
dna
exonerations
postconviction
dna
exoneration
cases
involved
eyewitness
misidentification
http
visited
available
clerk
case
file
dept
justice
national
institute
justice
eyewitness
evidence
guide
law
enforcement
iii
felony
convictions
overturned
dna
evidence
involved
eyewitness
misidentification
see
gabbert
memon
allan
wright
say
face
examining
effects
socially
encountered
misinformation
legal
criminological
psychol
douglass
steblay
memory
distortion
eyewitnesses
feedback
effect
applied
cognitive
psychol
see
brigham
bothwell
ability
prospective
jurors
estimate
accuracy
eyewitness
identifications
law
hum
behav
nearly
study
respondents
overestimated
accuracy
rates
identifications
see
also
sigler
couch
eyewitness
testimony
jury
verdict
psychol
see
cutler
penrod
mistaken
identification
lindsay
wells
rumpel
people
detect
accuracy
within
across
situations
applied
psychol
see
brewer
feast
rishworth
eyewitness
identification
experimental
psychol
applied
average
correlations
generally
estimated
little
see
also
sporer
penrod
read
cutler
choosing
confidence
accuracy
relation
eyewitness
identification
studies
psychol
bull
see
brief
wilton
dedge
et
al
amici
curiae