Legal Opinion

Pender v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided October 19, 1973No. 7048PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FICKLING, Associate Judge:

Appellant Joann Pender was convicted after a jury trial for violation of D.C.Code 1967, § 22-1506 (three-card monte statute) and § 22-2201 (grand larceny). On appeal she asserts: (1) that the post-lineup identi fication was impermissible in the absence of counsel, 1 and that the lineup itself was unnecessarily suggestive in violation of her right to due process of law; 2 thus, the testimony concerning the lineup was inadmissible; (2) that the complainant’s in-court identification lacked a source independent of the pre-trial lineup. After scrutinizing the record, we…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Harrington v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. Malcus T. Clemons v. United States of America, David E. Clark v. United States of America, Alvin C. Hines v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Singletary v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
  2. Crews v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. People v. WilliamsCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1978
  4. Crews v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1977
  5. Thorne v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API