State v. Hollen
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
DURRANT, Justice.
{1 Phillip Earl Hollen was convicted of two counts of aggravated robbery based on four eyewitness identifications. On appeal, Hollen claims that the trial court erred (1) in concluding that the eyewitness identifications were sufficiently reliable to be admitted at trial consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Utah Constitution, and (2) in not allowing a defense expert to give an opinion on the reliability of the process of identification. We affirm, concluding that (1) the eyewitness identifications in this case were at least as reliable as an identification deemed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. RamirezUtah Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. RimmaschUtah Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. LongUtah Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. LarsenUtah Supreme Court · 1993
3Cited by37 opinions
- State v. CloptenUtah Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. PereaUtah Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. MaestasUtah Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. HolmUtah Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. HubbardUtah Supreme Court · 2002
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.