State v. McKeithan
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HUSKINS, Justice.
Defendant contends his in-court identification by the witness Lawrence Rogers was based on unnecessarily suggestive pretrial identification procedures which violated due process. He therefore argues that the identification testimony of this witness was erroneously admitted. This constitutes his first assignment of error.
*727A voir dire was conducted at the first trial to determine whether defendant’s in-court identification was tainted by prior photographic identification procedures. The testimony of Lawrence Rogers on voir dire tends to show that the 7-Eleven Store on Highway 54…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- State v. GraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- State v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- State v. TuggleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. LarrimoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1995
- State v. CorbettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. FranksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- State v. CozartCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- State v. PerkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.