Legal Opinion

State v. Daniels

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 17, 1978No. 777SC638PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Defendant contends that the trial court committed reversible error by allowing the State’s witness, Carl Boswell, to make an in-court identification of defendant. He argues that the pretrial identification procedure in which defendant was shown singly to Boswell was so suggestive as to lead to a tainted identification. We cannot agree.

Although the practice of showing suspects singly for identification purposes has been recognized as suggestive and has been widely condemned, whether such confrontation violates due process depends upon the totality of the circumstances. Neil v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. State v. McKennaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. State v. GaitenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  4. State v. LankfordCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. SummeyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API