Also known as: in court identification · courtroom identification
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A witness's testimony identifying the defendant as the perpetrator during trial proceedings. Courts admit the identification when it rests on an independent source that purges any taint from a prior unconstitutional pretrial procedure. Reliability is assessed under the totality of the circumstances by weighing the witness's opportunity to view the perpetrator, degree of attention, accuracy of any prior description, level of certainty at confrontation, and time between the crime and the confrontation.
Irene Ingalls stood three feet from an unmasked robber in a well-lit bank and stared at his face for nearly a minute while handing over cash. She later gave a detailed description that matched the defendant. At trial she identified him in court. The court admitted the testimony after finding her opportunity to view and high attention supplied an independent source.
Igor Ito was indicted for theft. Agents then arranged a lineup at the hospital without notifying his lawyer and misled counsel about the timing. The nurse identified Ito at the lineup. The court suppressed the lineup identification but admitted the in-court identification because it rested on an independent source.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Ilana Isaacs glimpsed an intruder for several seconds under monitor light in a dark server room. She gave an accurate description immediately after the event. Three weeks later she identified the defendant from a single photo and again in court. The court admitted the in-court identification because her trained attention and accurate description established an independent source.
India Inoue was shown the defendant alone in her hospital room shortly after an assault. She identified him at the show-up and again in court. The court allowed the in-court identification after determining her initial observation supplied an independent source despite the suggestive procedure.
Isaac Irving testified at trial that he had identified the defendant in a prior photo array. Defense counsel sought to question him about possible bias arising from an earlier faulty identification. The court permitted the inquiry because the jury was entitled to assess the weight of the in-court identification.
Idina Iverson viewed an unmasked robber at close range for nearly a minute and gave an accurate description. Five days later police conducted a suggestive show-up. She identified the defendant again at trial. The court admitted the testimony because the opportunity to view, attention, and accurate description demonstrated independent reliability.
The identification is admissible if the prosecution shows it rests on an independent source. Courts weigh the witness's opportunity to view the perpetrator, degree of attention, accuracy of the prior description, level of certainty, and time between the crime and confrontation.
Supporting sources
No. The in-court identification is not excluded merely because the defendant's presence resulted from an unlawful detention. The witness may still testify if the identification rests on an independent source.
Supporting sources
The lineup identification must be suppressed. The court may still admit an in-court identification if the prosecution establishes an independent source by clear and convincing evidence.
Supporting sources
Suggestiveness alone does not require exclusion. The court examines the totality of circumstances and admits the testimony when reliability factors show the identification rests on the witness's original observation rather than the suggestive procedure.
Supporting sources
…that occurred at the lineup may deprive him of his only opportunity meaningfully to attack the credibility of the witness' courtroom identification. What facts have been disclosed in specific cases about the conduct of pretrial confrontations for identification illustrate both the potential for substantial prejudice to the accused at…