Sloan v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
The main issues in this case of armed robbery center around alleged suggestiveness in the procedures used in the identification of the defendant, Charles Sloan. We find that the identification procedures were so suggestive that they gave rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable mis-identification, that the in-court identification should therefore have been excluded, and that there was no other evidence sufficient to convict defendant; and on this basis we hold that defendant’s conviction should be reversed.
Defendant Charles Sloan’s trial and conviction arose out of an…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- State v. StricklandCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1993
- State v. PhilpottCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1994
- Commonwealth v. TaylorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- State v. GordonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- State v. MorganCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1991
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.