Legal Opinion
United States v. Robert Archibald
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 16, 1984No. 863, Docket 83-1356PublishedCited by 106 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OAKES, Circuit Judge:
We have previously emphasized the importance of ensuring fairness in eyewitness identification testimony. E.g., Kampshoff v. Smith, 698 F.2d 581, 585-86 (2d Cir.1983). Here, as in numerous other bank robbery prosecutions, the case principally turns on such testimony. The defendant argues that the photographic array presented to three eyewitnesses was unduly suggestive, an argument which we do not find persuasive. He also maintains that the in-court identification by these witnesses took place in impermissibly suggestive circumstances, an argument which we do find…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Foster v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Dorszynski v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by106 opinions
- United States v. Manuel Concepcion, Roberto Aponte, and Nelson FriasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Oscar Rosa, Vincent Lopez, Ricardo Rodriguez, Hector Hernandez, and Armando VelasquezCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- United States v. David Thai, Lan Ngoc Tran, Minh Do, Jimmy Nguyen, Hoang Huy Ngo, Quang Van Nguyen, and Lv Hong, A/K/A "l.v. Hong"Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Alex Wong, Roger Kwok, Chen I. Chung, Tung Tran, Danny Ngo, Brian Chan, Joseph Wang, Chiang T. Cheng, and Steven NgCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Maldonado-RiveraCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.