State v. Kaiser

Four propositions of law are preferred in this appeal.

The first is that the showing of a single mug shot of appellant to the eyewitness violated appellant’s due process rights and irretrievably tainted the identification. Appellant cites Simmons v. United States (1968), 390 U. S. 377. This court in State v. Perryman (1976), 49 Ohio St. 2d 14, 358 N. E. 2d 1040, at page 22, quoted the following from Simmons:

“ * * * we hold that each case must be considered on its own facts, and that convictions based on eyewitness identification at trial following a pretrial identification by photograph will…