Welcome to The Briefcase

Commentary and analysis of Ohio criminal law and whatever else comes to mind, served with a dash of snark.  Continue Reading »

×

Showups and Cold Stands

I got done with an appeals brief last week in a murder case where the primary issue was the identification of the defendant.  "Primary issue," in this case, translates to "the only assignment of error I could come up with that didn't make me laugh out loud."  As most criminal lawyers know, there's a constitutional dimension to eyewitness testimony:  it's a due process violation if the police use a procedure that's unnecessarily suggestive and likely to lead to a mistaken identification at trial.  One of those procedures is a "showup," also called a "cold stand," where the cops arrest someone shortly after the crime and take him back to the scene to see if the witnesses can identify him. 

That's what I had in my case.  It's fairly obvious that such a procedure is suggestive, and the courts have usually admitted as much, but that doesn't make much difference in the outcome; the courts almost invariably find that, from the "totality of the circumstances," the witnesses had a sufficiently independent basis for observing the defendant that the showup didn't impair that.  (The 8th District's most recent discussion of that subject is in this case from January.)  In fact, in the hundred-some cases that I looked at, I could find exactly one where the appeals court threw out the ID, involving a 74-year-old woman who claimed to have initially identified the defendant in a lineup.  The reliability of her claim was somewhat undercut by the fact that the police officers testified that no lineup had been conducted.

So, if you've got a case involving this, file a motion to suppress and ask for a hearing, because it'll give you some free discovery.  But unless the witness shows up with a dog and a cane, don't get your hopes up.

Search

Recent Entries

  • November 15, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Plea withdrawals (again), sexual predator hearings, and an appellate law question
  • November 7, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Don't listen to prosecutors about the law, good new/bad news jokes on appeal, and the Byzantine course of a death penalty case
  • October 24, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Trying to change the past
  • October 16, 2017
    En banc on sentencing
    The 8th District takes a look at what State v. Marcum means
  • October 13, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Musings about the death penalty and indigent defense
  • October 11, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS starts its new term, and the Ohio Supreme Court hands down two decisions
  • October 10, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Collaboration by inmates, fun in Juvenile Court, the limits of Creech, and more
  • October 5, 2017
    State v. Thomas
    The Ohio Supreme Court reverses a death penalty conviction
  • October 4, 2017
    Russ' Excellent Adventure
    A juror doesn't like me. Boo-hoo.
  • October 3, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    What not to argue on appeal, waiving counsel, the perils of being a juvenile, and expert witnesses