Also known as: photographic identification · photo identification · photo identifications · photo lineup · mug book identification
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A pretrial identification procedure in which a witness examines photographs to determine whether any depicts the perpetrator. The procedure does not constitute a critical stage of prosecution at which the Sixth Amendment guarantees the presence of counsel for the accused.
After formal charges, City of Newark detectives showed Donald photographs of law firm associates while Alexis's attorney Lois watched. They declined to notify Alexis or permit her counsel to attend. Donald identified Alexis. The identification remains admissible because the photo procedure is not a critical stage requiring counsel.
Investigator assembled an array containing Luis's older mugshot with distinctive facial hair absent from other photos. Oliver viewed the array two days after a brief encounter and identified Luis. The identification is admissible on Sixth Amendment grounds even though due process review remains available for suggestiveness.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Luis was already in custody on an unrelated charge and had requested counsel. Police displayed the photo array to Oliver without notice to Luis or his attorney. The absence of counsel does not violate the Sixth Amendment because photographic identifications fall outside the category of critical stages.
Detectives presented Vera with photographs of law firm associates after Tim's arrest but before formal charges. Vera identified Tim while her own attorney Annie observed. The prosecution may introduce the identification at trial because the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not attach to photographic procedures.
Police conducted a photo array while the suspect remained in custody on an unrelated matter. The witness identified the suspect from the photographs. The identification is admissible because custody status alone does not convert a photographic procedure into a critical stage requiring counsel.
Police showed a witness an array containing one standout photograph. The witness identified the suspect. The identification withstands Sixth Amendment attack because photographic procedures never require counsel, though the witness may still contest the identification under due process standards for suggestiveness.
No. Photographic identifications are not critical stages of prosecution. The accused is absent from the procedure, so counsel cannot provide meaningful assistance during the viewing itself. The right to counsel therefore does not attach regardless of when the photo array occurs.
Yes. Because photo lineups are not critical stages, the Sixth Amendment creates no right to counsel's presence or advance notice. The identification raises no Sixth Amendment issue and remains admissible at trial.
No. The right to counsel at identification procedures depends on the nature of the procedure rather than custody status or prior invocations in separate matters. Photographic arrays remain outside Sixth Amendment coverage even when the suspect is already in custody.
…compared to any of the fingerprints found. Tr. 97 (Dec. 6, 1984). The lead detective on the case, John Dillman, put together a photo lineup that included a photograph of Kyles (but not of Beanie) and showed the array to five of the six eyewitnesses who had given statements. Three of them picked the photograph of Kyles; the…