JAN shown that eyewitness identification procedures currently used. by law enforcement officials may lead to faulty eyewitness
|
|
|
- Catherine Norman
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 THE SENATE TWENTY-SIXTH LEGISLATURE, STATE OF HAWAII JAN 0 A BILL FOR AN ACT SaBa NO. 0. RELATING TO RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII: SECTION. The legislature finds that recent studies have shown that eyewitness identification procedures currently used by law enforcement officials may lead to faulty eyewitness identifications in law enforcement investigations. Studies have also shown that erroneous eyewitness identifications may be significantly decreased by implementing certain changes to eyewitness identification procedures. Eyewitness identifications that are more accurate and reliable increase the ability of police and prosecutors to convict the guilty and protect the people of this State. The purpose of this Act is to require new eyewitness identification procedures to improve the accuracy and reliability of eyewitness identifications in law enforcement investigations. SECTION. Chapter 0, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new part to be appropriately designated and to read as follows: "PART SB LRB -0.doc I Ill lllllll I Il BlIl lllll lllll illill I.ul/. EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION
2 Page 0- Definitions. For the purposes of this part: "Eyewitness" means a person who observes another person at or near the scene of an offense. "Filler" means a person or a photograph of a person who is not suspected of an offense and is included in an identification procedure. "Identification procedure" means a live lineup or photo lineup. "Investigator" means the person conducting the live lineup or photo lineup. "Live lineup" means a procedure in which a group of persons, including the person suspected of being the perpetrator of an offense and other persons not suspected of the offense, is displayed to an eyewitness for the purpose of determining whether the eyewitness is able to identify the suspect as the perpetrator. "Photo lineup" means a procedure in which an array of photographs, including a photograph of the person suspected of being the perpetrator of an offense and photographs of other persons not suspected of the offense, is displayed to an eyewitness for the purpose of determining whether the eyewitness is able to identify the suspect as the perpetrator. SB LRB -0.doc
3 Page S.B. NO.oy S0- Eyewitness identification procedures. Not later than January,, each county police department and all state investigative agencies identified by the attorney general shall adopt procedures for conducting live lineups and photo lineups that comply with the following requirements: () When practicable, the investigator shall be a person who is not aware of which person in the lineup is suspected of being the perpetrator of the offense; () When it is not practicable for the investigator to be a person who is not aware of which person in the lineup is suspected of being the perpetrator of the offense: (A) The lineup shall be presented simultaneously, not sequentially; and (B) The investigator shall state in writing the reason why the lineup was not conducted by a person who was not aware of which person in the live lineup or photo lineup was suspected of being the perpetrator of the offense; () The eyewitness shall be instructed prior to the identification procedure: SB LRB -0.doc
4 Page S.B. NO.0~ (A) That the suspected perpetrator may not be among the persons in the live lineup or photo lineup; and (B) That the eyewitness should not feel compelled to make an identification; () When a live lineup or photo lineup is conducted in sequence rather than simultaneously: (A) Each person or photograph shall be viewed one at a time; (B) The persons or photographs shall be displayed in random order; (C) The eyewitness shall take as much time as needed to make a decision about each person or photograph before viewing the next person or photograph; and (D) All persons or photographs in the live lineup or photo lineup shall be shown to the eyewitness, even if an identification is made before all persons or photographs have been viewed; () The fillers in a live lineup or photo lineup shall generally fit the description of the person suspected of being the perpetrator and, in the case of a photo SB LRB -0.doc
5 Page S.B. NO.W lineup, the photograph of the person suspected of being the perpetrator shall resemble the suspect's appearance at the time of the offense and shall not unduly stand out; () If the eyewitness has previously viewed a live lineup or photo lineup in connection with the identification of another person suspected of being involved in the offense, the fillers in the lineup that includes the person suspected of being the perpetrator shall be different from the fillers used in any prior lineups viewed by the eyewitness; () A live lineup shall include at least four fillers and a photo lineup shall include at least five fillers, in addition to the person suspected of being the perpetrator; () In a photo lineup, no writings or information concerning any previous arrest of the person suspected of being the perpetrator shall be visible to the eyewitness; () In a live lineup, any actions, such as speaking or gesturing or other movements that may identify the SB LRB -0.doc
6 Page S.B. NO.0 person suspected of being the perpetrator, shall be performed by all lineup participants; In a live lineup, all lineup participants shall be out of the view of the eyewitness at the beginning of the identification procedure; The person suspected of being the perpetrator shall be the only suspect included in the identification procedure; Nothing shall be said to the eyewitness regarding the position in the live lineup or photo lineup of the person suspected of being the perpetrator, except as otherwise provided in paragraph (); Nothing shall be said to the eyewitness that might influence the eyewitness' selection of the person suspected of being the perpetrator; The investigator shall seek to obtain from the eyewitness, in the eyewitness' own words, the eyewitness' level of confidence that the person or persons identified in the live lineup or photo lineup is the suspect; If the eyewitness identifies a person as the perpetrator, the eyewitness shall not be provided any SB LRB -0.doc
7 Page S.B. NO.zW information concerning the person prior to obtaining the eyewitness' statement that the eyewitness is certain of the selection; and () A written record of the identification procedure shall be made that includes the following information: (A) All results indicating the eyewitness' identification or inability to identify a person as the perpetrator obtained during the identification procedure, signed by the eyewitness, including the eyewitness' statement regarding how certain the eyewitness is of the selection; (B) The names of all persons present at the identification procedure; (C) The date and time of the identification procedure; (D) In a live lineup or photo lineup where the persons or photographs were presented sequentially as opposed to simultaneously, the order in which the persons or photographs were displayed to the eyewitness; SB LRB -0.doc I l lillil I I llllllll IIAI l II l lllllllllllll
8 Page S.B. NO.0~ (E) In a photo lineup, the photographs themselves, identification information, and the sources of all photographs used; and (F) In a live lineup, a photograph or other visual recording of the lineup that includes all persons who participated in the lineup. S0- Remedies for noncompliance. (a) Any evidence of a failure to comply with this part shall be: () Considered by the trial court in adjudicating motions to suppress eyewitness identification; and () Admissible at trial or hearings in support of claims of eyewitness misidentification as long as the evidence is otherwise admissible. (b) When any evidence of a failure to comply with the provisions of this part has been presented at trial, the jury shall be instructed that it may consider credible evidence of noncompliance in determining the reliability of eyewitness identifications. 0- Training of law enforcement officers. The attorney general shall create, administer, and conduct training programs for law enforcement officers and recruits on the methods and technical aspects of the eyewitness identification SB LRB -0.doc I ilim I IIIII li~ in IIIIIII IIIIIII III
9 Page S.B. NO.0 practices and procedures required in this part. The attorney general shall fund the training programs from appropriations specifically designated for the training programs." SECTION. Chapter 0, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by designating sections 0- through 0- as part I, entitled "General Provisions". SECTION. This Act shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY:
10 S.B. NO.ZOF Report Title: Criminal Procedure; Eyewitness Identification of Suspects; Live Lineups and Photo Lineups Description : Establishes procedures for eyewitness identification of persons suspected of perpetrating an offense in live lineups and photo lineups. The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent. SB LRB -0.doc
R.C Page 1. (1) Administrator means the person conducting a photo lineup or live lineup.
R.C. 2933.83 Page 1 Baldwin's Ohio Revised Code Annotated Currentness Title XXIX. Crimes--Procedure (Refs & Annos) Chapter 2933. Peace Warrants; Search Warrants (Refs & Annos) Evidentiary Provisions 2933.83
REPORT OF THE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST
REPORT OF THE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST DATE: February 27, 2018 TO: Honorable Members of the Rules, Elections, and Intergovernmental Relations Committee FROM: Sharon M. Tso Chief Legislative Analyst SUBJECT:
DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT
DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT Policy 7.42 Eyewitness Identifications Effective Date: 04/06/16 Replaces: 2-14.1 Approved: Ivan Barkley Chief of Police Reference: N/A I. POLICY Eyewitness identification is a
NORTH CAROLINA SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES BENCHBOOK VOIR DIRE ON PRETRIAL AND IN-COURT IDENTIFICATION
VOIR DIRE ON PRETRIAL AND IN-COURT IDENTIFICATION Robert Farb (UNC School of Government, Mar. 2015) Contents I. Introduction... 1 II. Findings of Fact... 2 III. Conclusions of Law... 7 IV. Order... 9 V.
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL INTRODUCED BY FERLO, STOUT, GREENLEAF, COSTA, KITCHEN, STACK AND FONTANA, APRIL 9, 2007 AN ACT
PRINTER'S NO. 814 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL No. 713 Session of 2007 INTRODUCED BY FERLO, STOUT, GREENLEAF, COSTA, KITCHEN, STACK AND FONTANA, APRIL 9, 2007 REFERRED TO JUDICIARY,
Virginia Beach Police Department General Order Chapter 8 - Criminal Investigations
Operational General Order 8.03 Lineups PAGE 1 OF 6 SUBJECT Virginia Beach Police Department General Order Chapter 8 - Criminal Investigations DISTRIBUTION ALL BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE: CALEA:
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION MODEL POLICY
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION MODEL POLICY I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for eyewitness identification procedures using photographic lineups, live lineups and showups. II.
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION REFORM ACT
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION REFORM ACT North Carolina Department of Justice Criminal Justice Standards Division UPDATE MATERIAL March 1, 2008 (Subject to periodic changes) NC EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION REFORM
Eyewitness identification is evidence received from a witness who has actually seen an event and can so testify in court.
Eyewitness identification is evidence received from a witness who has actually seen an event and can so testify in court. Eyewitness identifications are among the most common forms of evidence presented
Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association LINE-UP AND SHOW-UP PROCEDURES (Eyewitness Identification) MODEL POLICY GENERAL ORDER
Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association LINE-UP AND SHOW-UP PROCEDURES (Eyewitness Identification) MODEL POLICY GENERAL ORDER NUMBER POLICY NAME CALEA STANDARD PAGES 340.10 LINE-UP AND SHOW-UP PROCEDURES
LAST UPDATE: POLICY SOURCE: Chief of Police TOTAL PAGES: 7
ONALASKA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY ISSUE DATE: 10-28-2005 TITLE: Eyewitness Identification LAST UPDATE: 10-28-05 SECTION: Operations TEXT NAME: Eyewitness POLICY SOURCE: Chief of Police TOTAL PAGES: 7 AUTHOR:
THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT
Subject: Eyewitness Identification Page No. 1 THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER Authority: Chief of Police Subject: Eyewitness Identification Accreditation Standard: Chapter 42 Date Issued: March
SECTION: OPERATIONS OPR-229A EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS
SECTION: OPERATIONS OPR-229A CHAPTER: DIRECTIVE: FIELD PROCEDURES 229A.01 PURPOSE To establish a policy for the preparation and presentation of photographic and in-person lineups. 229A.02 DEFINITIONS Lineup
East Haven Police Department
East Haven Police Department Type of Directive: Policies & Procedures No. 417.2 Subject/Title: Issue Date: Eye Witness Identification July 29, 2014 Effective Date: References/Attachments: Connecticut Public
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS:
State Bar of Michigan Eyewitness Identification Task Force LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS: A Policy Writing Guide 2012 Contents OVERVIEW...3 A Note on Terminology...3 PURPOSE...4 Goals...4
ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
JOSEPH A. FOSTER ATTORNEY GENERAL ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 33 CAPITOL STREET CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE 03301-6397 ANNM. RICE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TO FROM: DATE: RE All Law Enforcement Agencies
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION
POLICY & PROCEDURE NO. 1.12 ISSUE DATE: 11/21/13 EFFECTIVE DATE: 11/21/13 MASSACHUSETTS POLICE ACCREDITATION STANDARDS REFERENCED: 1.2.3, 42.2.3(e), 42.1.11, 42.2.12 REVISION DATE: 08/09/14 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES
The Allegheny County Chiefs of Police Association EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES An Allegheny A County Criminal Justice Advisory Board Project In Partnership With The Allegheny County District Attorney
Contemporary Issues in Criminal Investigation and Prosecution Working Group EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION Model Policy February 2016
Contemporary Issues in Criminal Investigation and Prosecution Working Group EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION Model Policy February 2016 This policy is intended to allow for the individual needs of law enforcement
TYPE OF ORDER NUMBER/SERIES ISSUE DATE EFFECTIVE DATE General Order /3/2013 5/5/2013
TYPE OF ORDER NUMBER/SERIES ISSUE DATE EFFECTIVE DATE General Order 360.08 5/3/2013 5/5/2013 SUBJECT TITLE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DATES Eyewitness Identification: Photographic Line-Ups, N/A Physical Line-Ups
COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE
COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Subject: LINE-UPS AND SHOW-UPS Date of Issue: 02-10-2011 Number of Pages: 6 Policy No. I075 Distribution: ALL Review Date: Revision Date: I. Purpose
Identification Procedures
CITY OF MADISON POLICE DEPARTMENT Identification Procedures Eff. Date 05/12/2017 Purpose This outlines procedures to be used for conducting all identification procedures (show-ups, photo arrays and in-person
BILL AS INTRODUCED AND PASSED BY SENATE AND HOUSE S Page 1 of 11. Subject: Crimes; innocence protection; eyewitness identification
2014 Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 S.184 Introduced by Senators Sears, Ashe, and Benning Referred to Committee on Judiciary Date: January 7, 2014 Subject: Crimes; innocence
The first of these contains the FAQs concerning the main document.
This document contains the full text of two Texas documents on eyewitness identification and its administration adoption and implementation by Law Enforcement in the State of Texas, written and disseminated
2005 WISCONSIN ACT 60
Date of enactment: December 16, 2005 2005 Assembly Bill 648 Date of publication*: December 30, 2005 2005 WISCONSIN ACT 60 AN ACT to repeal 165.77 (2m) (a); to amend 165.77 (2m) (b), 165.81 (3) (b), 165.81
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N. In accordance with the parties plea-bargain agreement, the trial court
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ADRIAN GUARDADO, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant, Appellee. No. 08-14-00083-CR Appeal from the 171st Judicial District Court of El Paso County,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CLERMONT COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff : CASE NO CR 00706
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CLERMONT COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff : CASE NO. 2013 CR 00706 vs. : Judge McBride DYLAN SCOTT TUTTLE : DECISION/ENTRY Defendant : Catherine Adams, assistant prosecuting
SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT PROCEDURE
SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT PROCEDURE DATE: 04/04/2014 NUMBER: SUBJECT: 4.02 LEGAL EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION RELATED POLICY: 4.02 ORIGINATING DIVISION: OPERATIONAL SUPPORT NEW PROCEDURE: PROCEDURAL CHANGE:
New York State Photo Identification Guidelines
1. Introduction There are various ways to conduct a fair and reliable identification procedure. The guidelines below outline how a neutral, fair and reliable identification procedure can be conducted by
Eyewitness Identification. Leader Guide
Leader Guide Georgia Police Academy August 2008 Acknowledgements Development of this program Trademarks & Copyright Acknowledgements PowerPoint is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation. Official
AN ACT BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTIONA1.AAChapter 2, Code of Criminal Procedure, is
0 AN ACT relating to measures to prevent wrongful convictions. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTIONA.AAChapter, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended by adding Articles.0 and.
SUSPECT IDENTIFICATION
PROCEDURE NUMBER: 402 EFFECTIVE DATE: November 17, 1992 SUBJECT: SUSPECT IDENTIFICATION 402.1 PURPOSE: To establish a uniform procedure for the conduct of stand-up line-ups, photo array line-ups, and other
The People of the State of New York. against. Ismael Nazario, Defendant.
Decided on July 30, 2008 Supreme Court, Queens County The People of the State of New York against Ismael Nazario, Defendant. 3415/2006 William M. Erlbaum, J. The defendant was indicted in January of 2007
Marissa Boyers Bluestine, Legal Director. A Day in the Life of a PD Lightstream Communications CLE
Marissa Boyers Bluestine, Legal Director A Day in the Life of a PD Lightstream Communications CLE Exonerations Nationwide 311 inmates have been exonerated through DNA. 5 of those have been exonerated posthumously.
Jan Hoth, for appellant. Meredith Boylan, for respondent. Innocence Project, Inc.; Legal Aid Society et al., amici curiae.
================================================================= This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. -----------------------------------------------------------------
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DION BARNARD, No. 51, 2005 Defendant Below, Appellant, Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for v. New Castle County STATE OF DELAWARE,
2019COA32. A division of the court of appeals considers whether two guilty. pleas entered at the same hearing to two charges brought in
The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries
A NEW STRATEGY FOR PREVENTING WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS
A NEW STRATEGY FOR PREVENTING WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS After seven and a half hours in police custody, including a several hour polygraph test over three sessions that police informed him he was failing, 16
Supreme Court significantly revised the framework for determining the. 221, 590 P2d 1198 (1979), in light of current scientific research and adopt[ed]
![Supreme Court significantly revised the framework for determining the. 221, 590 P2d 1198 (1979), in light of current scientific research and adopt[ed]](/thumbs/83/88012138.jpg "Supreme Court significantly revised the framework for determining the. 221, 590 P2d 1198 (1979), in light of current scientific research and adopt[ed]")
I. The Oregon Evidence Code provides the first barrier to the admission of eyewitness identification evidence, and the proponent bears to burden to establish the admissibility of the evidence. In State
Innocence Protections Proposal
Innocence Protections Proposal presented to the Nevada State Advisory Commission on the Administration of Justice June 14, 2016 by the Rocky Mountain Innocence Center Innocence Project Introduction Protecting
2018COA6. No. 15CA1395 People v. Palacios Criminal Law Fifth Amendment Pre-Trial Identification; Evidence Demonstrative Evidence Admissibility
The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries
Eyewitness refers to an individual who personally witnessed the crime under investigation or observed the suspect in the area of the crime scene.
UW Madison Police Department Policy: 42.2 SUBJECT: INVESTIGATIONS-OPERATIONS EFFECTIVE DATE: 06/01/10 REVISED DATE: 02/15/17; 11/16/17; 03/23/18 REVIEWED DATE: 08/15/15 STANDARD: CALEA 42.2.1 42.2.12 IACLEA
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2007
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2007 Opinion filed August 8, 2007. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D07-1147 Lower Tribunal No. F06-39845
Exoneration Project Intake Application
The Exoneration Project (EP) works with a team of legal students, interns, and staff members in Chicago, Illinois to evaluate potential cases around the country. Due to the high number of requests that
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 18, 2016 v No. 327733 Wayne Circuit Court DORIAN WILLIE WALKER, LC No. 14-011073-01-FC Defendant-Appellant.
OUTLINE OF CRIMINAL COURT PROCESS
OUTLINE OF CRIMINAL COURT PROCESS What happens during a criminal case may be confusing to a victim or witness. The following summary will explain how a case generally progresses through Oklahoma s criminal
Case 3:16-cr BR Document 976 Filed 08/02/16 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 976 Filed 08/02/16 Page 1 of 7 Tiffany A. Harris OSB 02318 Attorney at Law 811 SW Naito Pkwy, Suite 500 Portland, Oregon 97204 t. 971.634.1818 f. 503.721.9050 tiff@harrisdefense.com
v No Wayne Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED April 17, 2018 v No. 337220 Wayne Circuit Court STEPHEN FOSTER, LC No. 16-005410-01-FC
American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary
American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary acquit: affidavit: alibi: amendment: appeal: arrest: arraignment: bail: To set free or discharge from accusation; to declare that the defendant is innocent
Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: JUNE 17, 2016; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2015-CA-000444-MR DAVID L. DAHMS APPELLANT APPEAL FROM FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT v. HON. THOMAS L. CLARK,
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED March 25, 2004 v No. 242027 Wayne Circuit Court RAPHAEL SANDERS, LC No. 01-012495-01 Defendant-Appellee.
No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States BARION PERRY, STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, Respondent. REPLY BRIEF
No. 10-8974 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States BARION PERRY, v. Petitioner, STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT REPLY BRIEF RICHARD GUERRIERO
COMMONWEALTH vs. SCOTT E. FIELDING. No. 18-P-342. Dukes. November 13, January 29, Present: Milkey, Henry, & Englander, JJ.
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal
I Saw You but Did I Really?:
I Saw You but Did I Really?: Eyewitness Identification Issues in Civil Cases Lori V. Berke Jody C. Corbett Berke Law Firm, PLLC 1601 N. 7th Street, Suite 360 Phoenix, AZ 85006 (602) 254-8800 lori@berkelawfirm.com
Supreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC03-1363 PER CURIAM. NATHANIEL CHARLES JONES, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [December 16, 2004] We initially accepted jurisdiction to review Jones v. State,
APPEAL from a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: TIMOTHY G. DUGAN, Judge. Affirmed.
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED September 3, 2008 David R. Schanker Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear
GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING QUESTIONNAIRE
GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Before completing the questionnaire please note: You must not be currently represented by counsel and the crime and conviction must have occurred in Michigan.
CAUSE NO STATE OF TEXAS IN THE 184 th C. WESLEY FIELDS HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OF AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR FUNDS
CAUSE NO. 1187210 STATE OF TEXAS IN THE 184 th VS. DISTRICT COURT C. WESLEY FIELDS HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OF AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR FUNDS COMES NOW the Defendant above named, by
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos CA-101 And 2002-CA-102
[Cite as State v. Kemper, 2004-Ohio-6055.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos. 2002-CA-101 And 2002-CA-102 v. : T.C. Case Nos. 01-CR-495 And
Constitution; Article I, Sections 19, 21, 23, 27, and 36, and Article XI, Section 2 of the. of and. A Rule 24 hearing was held on December 8,
NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION FILE NO. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) VS. ) ) ) Defendant. ) MOTION TO SUPPRESS TESTIMONY CONCERNING CERTAIN OUT-OF- COURT IDENTIFICATIONS
Testimony of Claire P. Gutekunst President New York State Bar Association
Testimony of Claire P. Gutekunst President New York State Bar Association Joint Legislative Public Hearing on the Proposed 2017-18 Public Protection Budget January 31, 2017 I am Claire P. Gutekunst, President
Criminal Procedure Amendment (Mandatory Pre-trial Defence Disclosure) Act 2013 No 10
New South Wales Criminal Procedure Amendment (Mandatory Pre-trial Defence Disclosure) Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 Schedule 1 Amendment of Criminal Procedure Act 1986 No 209 3 New South
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Pages 1-7 of The Report of the Advisory Committee on Wrongful Convictions
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [T]he most fundamental principle of American jurisprudence is that an innocent man not be punished for the crimes of another. 1 The source of public confidence in our criminal justice
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED August 18, 2016 v No. 326055 Wayne Circuit Court HYO SANG ROGERS, LC No. 14-007118-FC Defendant-Appellant.
Expert Eyewitness Testimony. By: Janine M. Kovacs
Expert Eyewitness Testimony By: Janine M. Kovacs Table of Contents Page Introduction 3 Part I: Topics for Expert Eyewitness Testimony 4 A. Cross Racial Identifications 4 B. Violence/Weapon Focus 5 C. Confidence-Accuracy
Jeffrey I. Dellheim, for appellant. Patrick J. Hynes, for respondent. In this case, turning on the accuracy of eyewitnesses'
================================================================= This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. -----------------------------------------------------------------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellee : : v. : : GEORGE VINCENT KUBIS, : : Appellant : No.
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellee : : v. : : GEORGE VINCENT KUBIS, : : Appellant : No. 3347 EDA 2013
Criminal Procedure Further Amendment (Evidence) Act 2005 No 25
New South Wales Criminal Procedure Further Amendment (Evidence) Act 2005 No 25 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Criminal Procedure Act 1986 No 209 2 4 Amendment of other Acts
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,163. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, MICHAEL MITCHELL, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 99,163 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. MICHAEL MITCHELL, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Once a district court has determined that an eyewitness identification
ROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS ROUNDUP: EVIDENTIARY ISSUES IN MEDICAL MALPRACTICE, RES IPSA, AND EXPERT TESTIMONY ON EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION ROY L. REARDON AND MARY ELIZABETH MCGARRY * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT
PUBLIC INFORMATION FUNCTION
AOM CHAPTER A 106 PUBLIC INFORMATION FUNCTION Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTORY DISCUSSION II. POLICY III. COORDINATION & CONTROL [ 54.1.1 ] IV. RELEASE OF INFORMATION PROCEDURES V. MEDIA ACCESS TO CRIME
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2008
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2008 Opinion filed July 16, 2008. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D06-2072 Lower Tribunal No. 04-33909
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Plaintiff, v. Case No. 04-C-0986
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN STEVEN A. AVERY, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 04-C-0986 MANITOWOC COUNTY, THOMAS H. KOCOUREK, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of
Investigative Negligence. Hill v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board (2007)
Investigative Negligence Hill v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board (2007) By Gino Arcaro M.Ed., B.Sc. Niagara College Coordinator Police Foundations Program I. Commentary Part 1 Every police
Section 1: Statement of Purpose Section 2: Voluntary Discovery Section 3: Discovery by Order of the Court... 2
Discovery in Criminal Cases Table of Contents Section 1: Statement of Purpose... 2 Section 2: Voluntary Discovery... 2 Section 3: Discovery by Order of the Court... 2 Section 4: Mandatory Disclosure by
SCMF IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCMF-11-0000315 18-DEC-2014 09:15 AM SCMF-11-0000315 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I In the Matter of the Publication and Distribution of the Hawai'i Pattern
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED December 13, 2012 v No. 305333 Shiawassee Circuit Court CALVIN CURTIS JOHNSON, LC No. 2010-001185-FH
STATE OF OHIO KIRKLAND FARMER
[Cite as State v. Farmer, 2010-Ohio-3406.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 93246 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. KIRKLAND FARMER
Third District Court of Appeal
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 18, 2016. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D14-2418 Lower Tribunal No. 09-33121 Tyler Darnell, Appellant,
THAT S THE GUY! : FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE 801(d)(1)(C) AND OUT-OF-COURT STATEMENTS OF IDENTIFICATION
THAT S THE GUY! : FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE 801(d)(1)(C) AND OUT-OF-COURT STATEMENTS OF IDENTIFICATION Gilbert M. Rein TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 1540 I. BACKGROUND... 1542 A. Terminology and an
Regulatory Agenda
2016-2017 Regulatory Agenda Hilary Johnson/Policy Analyst November 1, 2016 Summary of Agency Rule Reviews (Regulatory Plan Progress) The Colorado Department of Corrections (DOC) began conducting rule reviews
NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I
NO. CAAP-10-0000120 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I STATE OF HAWAI'I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHN K. IOPA, Defendant-Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Michael Stewart v. State of Maryland - No. 79, 1995 Term
Michael Stewart v. State of Maryland - No. 79, 1995 Term EVIDENCE - Signed prior inconsistent statement made by a recanting witness may be admitted as substantive evidence even though the party calling
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED January 14, 2016 v No. 323466 Wayne Circuit Court EDWARD RHONE, LC No. 12-010594-FC Defendant-Appellant.
ALABAMA VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS1
ALABAMA VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS1 Constitution Art. I, 6.01 Basic rights for crime victims. (a) Crime victims, as defined by law or their lawful representatives, including the next of kin of homicide victims,
JEFFERSON COLLEGE COURSE SYLLABUS CRJ114 RULES OF CRIMINAL EVIDENCE. 3 credit hours. Prepared by: Mark A. Byington
JEFFERSON COLLEGE COURSE SYLLABUS CRJ114 RULES OF CRIMINAL EVIDENCE 3 credit hours Prepared by: Mark A. Byington Revised by: Mark A. Byington Revised Date: August 2014 Dr. Sandy Frey, Chair, Social Science
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Plaintiff, v. Case No. 04-C-0986
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN STEVEN A. AVERY, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 04-C-0986 MANITOWOC COUNTY, THOMAS H. KOCOUREK, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of
Chapter 1. Crime and Justice in the United States
Chapter 1 Crime and Justice in the United States Chapter Objectives After completing this chapter, you should be able to do the following: Describe how the type of crime routinely presented by the media
for industrial purposes including paper, textiles, biodegradable plastics, construction, and fuel. The commercial success of
THE SENATE TWENTY-SIXTH LEGISLATURE, 0 STATE OF HAWAII JAN 0 A BILL FOR AN ACT S.B. NO.g0 RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL HEMP RESEARCH. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII: SECTION. The legislature
Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision Privacy Policy Interstate Compact Offender Tracking System Version 3.0 Approved 04/23/2009 Revised on 4/18/2017 1.0 Statement of Purpose The goal of
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I. ---o0o--- STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-11-0000550 30-JAN-2014 09:23 AM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I ---o0o--- STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. SHAUN L. CABINATAN, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.
Section: 2.310, Page 1 of 10 Effective: August 5, 2011 Reissued: 08/25/16. Towson University Police Department Manual of General Directives
Section: 2.310, Page 1 of 10 2.310 EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION These directives are adapted from the Maryland Police Training Commission s eyewitness identification model policy. See also Public Safety (PS)
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE FEBRUARY 1999 SESSION
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE FEBRUARY 1999 SESSION FILED June 18, 1999 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk ) Appellee, ) C.C.A. No. 01C01-9712-CR-00561
Specialized Training: Investigating Sexual Abuse in Correctional Settings Notification of Curriculum Utilization December 2013
Specialized Training: Investigating Sexual Abuse in Correctional Settings Notification of Curriculum Utilization December 2013 The enclosed Specialized Training: Investigating Sexual Abuse in Correctional
Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step
Criminal Law & Procedure For Paralegals Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step Path of Criminal Cases in Queens Commencement Arraignment Pre-Trial Trial Getting The Defendant Before The Court! There are four
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018 Effective July 1, 1975, as amended to Dec. 1, 2017 The goal of this 2018 edition of the Federal Rules of Evidence 1 is to provide the practitioner with a convenient copy
STATE OF LOUISIANA NO KA-1346 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL GREGORY SKIPPER FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS GREGORY SKIPPER * * * * * * * * * * * NO. 2011-KA-1346 COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA APPEAL FROM *CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT ORLEANS PARISH NO. 477-105, SECTION
Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step
Criminal Law & Procedure For Paralegals Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step 2 Getting Defendant Before The Court! There are four methods to getting the defendant before the court 1) Warrantless Arrest 2)
Signature: Signed by GNT Date Signed: 12/10/13
Atlanta Police Department Policy Manual Standard Operating Procedure Effective Date: December 30, 2013 Polygraph and Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Applicable To: All sworn employees Approval Authority:
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY
[Cite as State v. Morris, 2012-Ohio-22.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY STATE OF OHIO : : Appellate Case No. 24034 Plaintiff-Appellee : : Trial Court Case No.