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
From the beginning Fred was fast to respond to my initial inquiry (while he was on vacation) when other lawyers took a week or never even responded. Fred was professional, understanding of my situation and on point with the the expected timelines due the delays COVID had put on the courts. The courts had objections on a few occasions and forced me to appeal on another but, Fred stood his ground for me and followed through until my matter was resolved as I expected. I recommend Mr. Sisto if you are in need his services. I will definitely use him again if I ever need to.
Steve
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Although I don't know Fred, he has my appreciation in his fight for my liberty. Mothers against drunk driving have ruined as many lives as they have saved. We need bread and butter laws in N. J ! Stopping moterists assuming they are breaking a law is against my rights. N. J. Is a police state with a cop on every corner. From the unjust gas tax to the corruption in Trenton, we need more attorneys like Frederick Sisto. He is aware of the people's shrinking liberties.
Freehold F
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
Very good, extremely professional ,
Franco F
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred Sisto is amazing!! Definitely recommend
Jen A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Recently I encountered some legal matters in the state of New Jersey during my visit and it would have became serious if it was not taken care of. Mr. Sisto and I discussed the case through the phone and exchanged documents through email. Since I was unable to travel back and forth due to restricted time, I have asked Mr. Sisto to handle the case on my behalf. I was very pleased with the result and would recommend Mr. Sisto for any legal matters.
Nam N
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
....and his Dog Gonzo is a great attorney.
Duane H
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred was very professional, competent, and a pleasure to deal with I cant thank him enough I highly recommend his services
Mildred T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred's services has been more than exceptional. He provided updates on my case. He got me one of the best outcomes i could have asked for, and has represented me twice with amazing results. Fred can work his magic on your case just as he did for me
Chris K
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred was incredibly helpful during a very stressful time. Even during a pandemic he was fast at responding to any and all questions or problems that I had. He went above and beyond to make sure that I was happy with my results and that my case was being handled properly all the way through. Highly recommend this office!
Toni V