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. Sisto was not only a knowledgeable and excellent lawyer, he was compassionate and understanding during this difficult time. I found Mr. Sisto to always be available and he services were affordable and effective. You will not find a better lawyer.
Joseph S
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Estoy realmente satisfecho con el excelente trabajo que hizo el abogo en mi caso de DIU. Agradecido por que el caso fue un éxito, ya que además tiene mucho conocimiento en estos casos y no dudo que en otros casos también. Lo recomiendo totalmente.
Luis A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
For the people. For the little guy My legal bully
Glennlykesmusic
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great location
John G
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Current Pre law students and I had a question pertaining to a certain scenario in class. He responded back and gave me a case that broke down exactly what I asked for.
Chad T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very knowledgeable with expungement!!! Thanks again!!!
Nicole B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Called back within 10 minutes,very easy to talk to. Not judgmental at all. I am hopeful about the outcome.
Colleen H
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
On time and on point. Very knowledgeable
Ron T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Sisto and his entire staff were courteous, professional and got our case handled quickly and to the best outcome. Great lawyer. Highly recommend.
Bryan B
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