United States v. Archibald
United States v. Robert ARCHIBALD
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Before IRVING R. KAUFMAN, OAKES and WINTER, Circuit Judges.
Order On Petition For Rehearing
We wish to make it clear in respect to that portion of our opinion relating to in-court procedures for identification that special procedures are necessary only where (1) identification is a contested issue; (2) the defendant has moved in a timely manner prior to trial for a lineup; and (3) despite that defense request, the witness has not had an opportunity to view a fair out-of-court lineup prior to his trial testimony or ruling on the fairness of the out-of-court lineup has been reserved. Subject to this modification of the opinion, 734 F.2d 938 , the petition for rehearing is denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 3 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(noting that defendants wishing to take advantage of its ruling must “move[ ] in a timely manner prior to trial for a lineup”)
-
(“Any witness, especially one who has watched trials on television, can determine which of the individuals in the courtroom is the defendant...”)
-
(first-time in-court identification was impermissibly suggestive where defendant was only African-American in court room, but although trial judge erred by rejecting defendant’s request for in-court lineup as inappropriate, error did not prejudice defendant)
Cited by 36 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.