Legal Opinion

Dunn v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 12, 1986No. 84-2351PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The judgment of conviction from which the defendant appeals is affirmed upon a holding that the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress identification testi*809mony since the identification procedure did not give rise to a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification, see Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 93 S.Ct. 375, 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972); Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); Grant v. State, 390 So.2d 341 (Fla. 1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 913, 101 S.Ct. 1987, 68 L.Ed.2d 303 (1981), and, further, since an identification made shortly after…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Grant v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
  4. State v. BakerSupreme Court of Florida · 1984
  5. State v. FreberSupreme Court of Florida · 1978

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Williams v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  2. Collier v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API