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

  • May 25, 2017
    "Clarifying" post-release controls
    A look at the Supreme Court's decision in State v. Grimes
  • May 23, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Allied offenses, and two search cases
  • May 23, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Allied offenses, and two search cases
  • May 22, 2017
    Case Update
    Is SCOTUS looking for a forfeiture case? Plus, appellate decisions on expungement and restitution, plain error, and what a judge has to tell a defendant about sex registration
  • May 19, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th - Part II
    Decisions on lineups and prior calculation and design, and two out of eight (eight!) pro se defendants come up winners,
  • May 17, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th - Part I
    Taking a first look at some of the 8th District's decisions over the past two weeks
  • May 16, 2017
    Case Update
    Stock tips, Federal sentencing reform goes dormant, schoolbag searches, and the retroactivity of State v. Hand
  • May 8, 2017
    Case Update
    Death in Arkansas, a worrisome disciplinary decision, and appellate cases on speedy trial, arson registration, use of prior testimony, and the futility of post-conviction relief
  • May 2, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Nothing but sex
  • May 1, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS closes out oral argument for the Term, the Ohio Supreme Court has seven of them this week, and we report on a decision where you'll probably want to play Paul Simon's "Still Crazy After All These Years" in the background while you read about it