Legal Opinion
State v. Eacret
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided February 8, 1999No. 38812-6-I, 38832-1-IPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Per curiam
— A photographic montage is not impermissibly suggestive merely because three of the eight photos in the array were of accused assailants. Rather, a suggestive montage is one that directs undue attention to a particular photo. Because the montage used to identify David Paul Eacret as one of three men who participated in an assault did not highlight his photo, his second degree assault conviction is affirmed.
FACTS
After speaking with several witnesses and the defendants, a police officer constructed an eight-photograph montage that included photos of Paul, Kevin, and Barry Eacret. Each photo…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. HilliardWashington Supreme Court · 1977
- United States v. Lawrence Cunningham, United States of America v. Richard Dews, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1970
- State v. VaughnWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. WeddelCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. LinaresCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1999
- State v. KinardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
- State v. BarkerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- State v. BarkerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- State v. KinardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.