Criminal Procedure — in-court identifications

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — in-court identifications

The passage of nine months between a crime and a witness’ selection of the defendant from a photo array does not render the identification inadmissible.

“Considering all of the factors, we do not find this testimony to be unreliable. Although Johnson’s lack of attention to Lee on the night of the shooting and the extended duration of time between their initial encounter and the identification raise some concern, the testimony was nonetheless constitutionally reliable when considered with the other Biggers factors. Certainly Johnson’s testimony was not received without some flaws, as is most evidence that is properly examined, but these are issues for the jury to decide in weighing any questionable discrepancies. Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 116 (1977) (‘[E]vidence with some element of untrustworthiness is customary grist for the jury mill. Juries are not so susceptible that they cannot measure intelligently the weight of identification testimony that has some questionable feature.’) Accordingly, we find no error.”

Affirmed.

13-1314 Lee v. Foster

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Griesbach, J., Kanne, J.