Eyewitness Identification Procedures (Part 2)

by | May 22, 2019 | Blog, Criminal Law, Legal Procedures, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

The majority continued in relevant part: Eugene Roberts pulled into the driveway of his home in Newark. As Roberts got out of his car, three men approached him. One of the men pointed a revolver at Roberts’ torso and demanded money. Another man, later identified as defendant Ibnmauric Anthony, asked for Roberts’ car keys. The man searched the car as Roberts watched and then tossed the keys to the ground before all three walked away. Roberts called the police and gave a statement.

Two days later, Roberts returned to the police station to look at a photo array. Detective Karima Hannibal administered the array. She was not involved in the case and did not know the suspect’s identity. Detective Hannibal read a series of instructions to Roberts, showed him the array, and recorded his response. She used three pre-printed Newark Police Department forms to document the identification procedure.

A grand jury indicted defendant, who moved to suppress the out-of-court identification and asked for a pretrial hearing under United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967), and Henderson.  Defendant argued that it was improper for law enforcement officers not to memorialize or record the dialogue during the viewing of the photo array because there was no way to know if any impermissibly suggestive behavior took place.

The trial court denied defendant’s motion and request for a pretrial hearing. Trial began, and the case rested on Roberts’ identification. To instruct the jury, the trial court used the model jury charge for eyewitness identification, Model Jury Charges (Criminal), “Identification:  In-Court and Out-of-Court Identifications” (rev. July 19, 2012) (Identification Charge). Defendant did not object or ask for a supplemental charge about the administration or recording of the photo array. The jury convicted defendant on all counts.

This case demonstrates the importance of renewing a pre-trial objection during trial when the issue re-presents itself. Otherwise, your adversary can argue that the issue was waived or is subject to a plain error standard of review.

Excellent rating
Based on 288 reviews
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Fred Sisto is really an amazing attorney! Professional, knowledgeable, and effective. He made me feel comfortable in knowing he was working countless hours on my case to get me the best possible outcome. Mr. Sisto was very responsive and kept me updated with all court proceedings/updates. I am thankful to have had him represent me. I will be recommending Mr. Sisto & his firm to anyone in need. Thanks again ! Much Appreciated
Javier B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
i have not needed the service of fred sisto but am grateful for the notices i receive
Bill P
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very informative. Would not hesitate to use Attorney Sisto.
Rose C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Exquisite business ethic couldn't ask for a better service from a lawyer superior job def recommend to friends family and even strangers
Lukas A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred was extremely helpful and knowledgable. He made the whole process as painless and easy as possible.
Toli C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great legal advice and services
Karen E
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I recommend good lawyer
Norman T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I would highly recommend Frederick Sisto to anyone seeking legal representation that is fair, honest and will keep your best interest forefront. should the situation arise, i would not hesitate to seek representation from Frederick Sisto again.
Rmean
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I was very pleased with my representation by Fred Sisto. He is very honest and explained everything to me in detail. I would recommend him to anybody who is seeking legal representation..
Jeff M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I am writing to share my experience working with Fred From the very beginning, he provided outstanding service and demonstrated a high level of professionalism. He was attentive to my needs, communicated clearly, and always made sure I understood each step of the process. What impressed me most was his efficiency—he handled my case quickly without compromising on quality. His dedication and expertise gave me confidence and peace of mind throughout the entire process. I highly recommend Fred to anyone seeking reliable and effective legal support. His commitment to his clients and ability to deliver results promptly truly set him apart.
Aida F