Pender v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
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
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Harrington v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- 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
- Singletary v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
- Crews v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1977
- People v. WilliamsCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1978
- Crews v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1977
- Thorne v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982