In re Duane F.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Marlow, J.

This is a single eyewitness identification case. The complainant, also the eyewitness, did not testify at the Sirois,1 Wade or fact-finding hearings. The only evidence admitted at the fact-finding hearing about the identification procedure was the transcript of the prior hearsay testimony of a police officer, who had determined, without a legally adequate foundation, that the complaining witness and Duane F. (hereinafter appellant) were known to each other. He therefore conducted a “confirmatory” station house showup, a procedure that is not justified on this…