create a small paragraph summarizing the following information.

Introduction

• There are three types ofeyewitness identification:
  • Lineups: victims or eyewitnesses view a group and are asked to identify the perpetrator.
    • Fillers,foils,ordistractors: people innocent of the particular offense who are recruited by the police to participate in the lineup.
  • Showups: The police stage aconfrontationbetween the victim or eyewitness and a single suspect.
  • Photograph identification: Victims or eyewitnesses are asked to determine if the perpetrator is pictured in any photographs provided.
• Scientific identification:uses scientific techniques such as fingerprints or DNA to identify the perpetrator of a crime.
• These types of identifications serve several functions:
  • Identification: narrows the range of individuals under investigation.
  • Exoneration: eliminates suspects from the investigation.
  • Indictment: leads to charging an individual with a crime.
  • Confidence in indictment and conviction: Identifications supplement the other evidence at trial and increase confidence that the defendant was properly indicted, prosecuted, and convicted.
• In-court identification:when an eyewitness testifies that the individual they saw earlier is the defendant sitting at the defense table.
• Two constitutional tests for identifications:
  • Sixth Amendment: right to counsel.
  • Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment: protection of due process of law.
• Wrongful Convictions and Eyewitness Identification: Perception, Memory, and Identification
  • Misidentifications
    • Identification is an inexact process and misidentifications are the primary cause of false convictions.
  • Perception
    • Perception is the observing of the crime.
    • Psychologists identify three sets of factors that explain misidentifications:
      • Crime factors: The ability to perceive what occurred may be limited when the crime is committed quickly.
      • Victim factors: Victims may be too nervous to focus on the perpetrator and can only offer a general description.
        • There is also a tendency to perceive "what we expect to see," which is when bias, prejudice, and fear influence how a witness may identify a perpetrator.
      • Offender factors: Perpetrators may hide their features, there could be multiple offenders, or the crime could occur at night, making it hard to see them.
  • Memory
    • Memory is the personal diary of what happened.
    • Memories can fade and change with the passage of time.
    • The power of suggestion can unconsciously change memories.
  • Identifications
    • Identification also has threats to accuracy, such as:
      • Selection: Witnesses select the individual in a lineup or photo display who most closely resembles their memory, even when none of them fit the memory well.
      • Suggestiveness: The police examiner may unintentionally or intentionally influence a witness's identification.
      • Closure: A victim may become tired and identify an individual as the perpetrator to move on with their life.
  • The identification process
    • Goals of the identification process include:
      • Police influence: eliminating the possibility of the police officer influencing the eyewitness.
      • Pressure: limiting the pressure on the witness to select one of the individuals in the lineup/display.
      • Accuracy: increasing accuracy of identifications.
    • Double-blind:when neither the administrator of the identification process nor the eyewitness is aware of which individual in the lineup is the suspect.
    • Sequential presentation:Participants in the lineup are presented to the witness one at a time, and the witness is asked to rank their degree of confidence in the decision.
    • Simultaneous lineup:All lineup members are shown to the witness at the same time.
    • Composition of a lineup or photographic display should consider:
      • Balance: Participants in the lineup should be similar in age, height, weight, and race, and should be dressed in similar fashion.
      • Distinctive features: Fillers should possess the offender's distinctive features mentioned by the witness during the prelineup investigation; participants may be required to speak or make physical gestures.
      • Number: A minimum of five fillers in photo arrays and four fillers in lineups.
      • Preservation: The results should be recorded by police on a standard form.
      • Photographs: In photo arrays, all photographs should be uniform and neutral in appearance, and there should be no identifying marks, such as writing on the back of the photos.
• The Sixth Amendment and Eyewitness Identifications: The Right to a Lawyer
  • TheWade-Gilbertruleprovides:
    • The right to a lawyer at all postindictment lineups and confrontations.
    • Absent the presence of a lawyer, postindictment lineup or showup results may not be introduced by the prosecutor at trial.
    • A prosecutor may not ask a witness for an in-court identification of the defendant unless the prosecutor establishes by clear evidence that the in-court identification is not the product of an identification where the suspect was denied a lawyer.
    • This rule was established by theUnited States v. Wadecase and affirmed by theGilbert v. Californiacase.
  • The Sixth Amendment and critical stages of criminal prosecution
    • Critical stages of a criminal proceeding:The procedures following the initiation of criminal proceedings at which failure to provide the defendant a lawyer may prevent them from obtaining a fair trial.
    • A lawyer present at the lineup provides the defendant two levels of protection:
      • Protection at the identification: ensures the process is fair and reliable.
      • Protection at the trial: The lawyer can point out to the jury that the lineup was unfair.
  • The threat of suggestive lineups
    • Suggestive procedures:Thepolice often believe they have arrested the perpetrator of the crime and either unintentionally or intentionally communicate this to the witness.
  • The role of the defense attorney
    • The lawyer should observe the lineup and take note of how the police conduct it.
    • The lawyer's presence provides an incentive for police to ensure fair procedures.
  • Tainted lineups and courtroom identifications
    • InGilbert,the Supreme Court held that a witness may still identify the offender when the prosecution establishes that the in-court identification is based on observations not derived from the lineup.
• The Sixth Amendment and Prearraignment Identifications: Critical v. Noncritical Stages
  • InKirby v. Illinois,the Supreme Court held that a showup following arrest but before the initiation of adversary criminal proceedings is not a critical stage.
  • Two reasons given:
    • Efficiency: During the investigative stage, the police do not need to slow their investigation and delay lineups and showups until the defendant hires a lawyer.
    • Prosecution: Filing of a formal charge indicates that the government has decided to prosecute the accused, and it is at this point that they are in need of legal protection, advice, and assistance.
• The Sixth Amendment and Photographic Displays: Lawyer Need Not Be Present.
  • InUnited States v. Wade, the Supreme Court held that an individual had no right to a lawyer to observe the taking of fingerprints, hair, and blood samples, and other tests that relied on standard scientific techniques and procedures.
    • The Court reasoned that the defense attorney and defense experts could examine the test results and procedures after the test and cross-examine the police laboratory technicians at trial.
  • Photographic displays,ornoncorporeal identifications, pose a particular challenge.
    • The defense attorney can examine the photographs used, but unless the lawyer is present, there is no way of knowing what occurred during the identification.
  • InUnited States v.Ash, the Supreme Court held that a postindictment photographic display is not a critical stage.
    • During a photographic display, the accused is not present and therefore has no need for a lawyer's assistance.
  • The lawyer can guard against suggestiveness by inspecting the format of the photographs and can point out any bias to the jury.
  • Corporeal identifications:lineups or showups.
• The Due Process Test: Pre- and Postindictment Lineups, Showups, and Photographic Displays
  • InStovall v. Denno,the Supreme Court held that suspects in the preindictment phase are protected by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
  • Due process test applies throughout the entire criminal justice process.
    • Applies to lineups, showups, and photographic displays both pre and postindictment.
• Suggestiveness, Reliability, and the Totality of the Circumstances: Determine If a Witness Testifies at Trial
  • InMason v. Brathwaite,the Supreme court adopted a "totality of circumstances" test to the admission of identifications under the due process test.
  • Four steps involved in determining whether to admit identification evidence under this test:
    • First, the defendant must establish by a preponderance of evidence that the procedure was suggestive.
      • Suggestive:The defendant must establish that identification was impermissibly suggestive by preponderance of evidence.
    • Second, the prosecution must demonstrate that the procedure is reliable.
      • Reliable:The prosecution must demonstrate that the identification can be trusted.
    • Reliability is determined by a totality of circumstances considering various factors relating to the witness's observation of the offender.
    • The judge then examines six factors to determine the reliability:
      • Perception: the chance to view the offender at the crime.
      • Concentration: the ability to focus on the offender's appearance.
      • Accuracy of the description of the suspect after the crime.
      • Certainty in the identification of the defendant.
      • Time: length of time between the crime and identification.
      • Other evidence: any additional evidence that the defendant was involved in the crime.
    • Last, these factors are to be weighed against the fact that the witness may be influenced by the suggestiveness of the identification and the judge must rule whether the identification is admissible or inadmissible.
      • Admissible:The witness may testify at trial if the judge determines based on the totality of circumstances that there is no likelihood of irreparable misidentification.
      • Inadmissible:The witness may not testify at trial if there is substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.
• The Requirement of Police Involvement: Reliability and Creditworthiness
  • InPerry v. New Hampshire,the Supreme Court held that due process does not require a trial court to screen evidence for reliability before allowing the jury to assess its creditworthiness.
    • In this case, the law enforcement officials did not arrange for the suggestive circumstances surrounding the identification.
  • The jury is the ultimate umpire of the reliability of witnesses and a defendant's guilt and innocence.
  • Judges may allow defendants to counter eyewitness testimony by presenting expert witnesses to testify on the shortcomings of eyewitness testimony and can give instructions to jurors cautioning them on placing too much weight on eyewitness testimony.
• Scientific Identification: Determining Admissibility of Scientific Evidence
  • Fryetestasks if a scientific technique or approach is established enough to gain general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.
    • Articulated inFrye v. United States.
  • Dauberttestasks a judge to study the research and views of experts and reach their own conclusion to if the scientific technique is reliable.
    • Established inDaubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.
• DNA Evidence: Provides a Genetic Match to a Person at the Crime Scene
  • Bertillon method:identification of criminals through the precise physical measurement of eleven physical dimensions and the charting of scars and unusual physical attributes.
    • Named after Alphonse Bertillon, a Paris police officer who pioneered the method.
  • DNA:a molecule that stores an individual's unique genetic code.
  • DNA analysis can be used for:
    • Detection: connect individuals to various criminal acts.
    • Investigation: include or exclude an individual as a suspect.
    • Guilt or innocence: establish guilt or innocence at a trial; individuals who have been convicted may discover DNA evidence that establishes their innocence.
  • Flaws of DNA analysis include:
    • Contamination: DNA samples may become mixed up, or DNA may deteriorate as a result of failure to safeguard the sample.
    • Laboratory procedures: mistakes in laboratory analysis or in calculating statistical probabilities.
    • Significance: There may be numerous explanations for the presence of a suspect's DNA at a crime scene.
    • Relevancy: DNA is not always relevant to the issue in the case (for example, consent is the issue in a rape prosecution).
  • The admissibility of DNA evidence
    • DNA evidence is now considered admissible by every state and federal court.
    • It is only excluded when the DNA sample has been contaminated or when there was a failure to follow accepted procedures.
  • DNA databases
    • Combined DNA Index System (CODIS):an electronic database that integrates DNA profiles contained in criminal offender databases of the fifty states and federal government.
    • A forensic index contains DNA collected at crime scenes.
  • Collection of DNA
    • DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act provides that persons convicted of certain federal crimes who are incarcerated or on parole, probation, or supervision must provide a bodily sample that can be used for DNA analysis.
      • As seen inUnited States v. Kincade.
    • InMaryland v. King,the Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of the Maryland DNA Collection Act that subjects arrestees charged with a crime of violence or attempt to commit a crime of violence to a DNA swab analysis.
      • Many states and the federal government authorized the taking of a DNA sample from individuals arrested for various felonies.
    • The Supreme Court held that taking of DNA was a routine administrative procedure following an arrest that constituted a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.
  • Exonerating the innocent
    • DNA has been used to exonerate the innocent as well as convict the guilty.
• Polygraph Evidence: Lie Detector Test Admissibility
  • Polygraph:a "lie detector," which is a test that measures an individual's physiological responses to questions asked to determine if they're being truthful.
  • The polygraph is not generally considered admissible into evidence because it is not viewed as generally accepted by the scientific community and has not been established as reliable by federal courts.
    • The Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of the prohibition on polygraph evidence inUnited States v. Scheffer.
  • Criminal procedure in the news
    • Misconduct by forensic laboratory personnel has led to wrong convictions.