{"id":36564,"date":"2008-03-26T16:35:41","date_gmt":"2008-03-26T21:35:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-legal\/uncategorized\/criminal-law-photographic-identification-not-impermissibly.html"},"modified":"2008-03-26T16:35:41","modified_gmt":"2008-03-26T21:35:41","slug":"criminal-law-photographic-identification-not-impermissibly","status":"publish","type":"corporate","link":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/litigation-disputes\/criminal-law-photographic-identification-not-impermissibly.html","title":{"rendered":"Criminal Law: Photographic Identification Not Impermissibly Suggestive"},"content":{"rendered":"<section class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline\">\n    <div class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-content\">\n                    <p><em>This article was edited and reviewed by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/company\/our-team.html\" rel=\"noopener\">FindLaw Attorney Writers<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n                | Last reviewed\n        <time>\n                            May 07, 2026\n                    <\/time>\n    <\/div>\n\n    \n    <details class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-toggle fl-gutenberg-byline-legally-reviewed\">\n        <summary>\n            <i class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\"><\/i>\n            Legally Reviewed\n        <\/summary>\n\n        <div class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-toggle-content\">\n            <p><em>This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy, clarity, and style by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/company\/our-team.html\" rel=\"noopener\">FindLaw\u2019s team of legal writers and attorneys<\/a> and in accordance with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/company\/company-history\/editorial-policy.html\" rel=\"noopener\">our editorial standards<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n        <\/div>\n    <\/details>\n\n    <details class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-toggle fl-gutenberg-byline-fast-checked\">\n        <summary>\n            <i class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\"><\/i>\n            Fact-Checked\n        <\/summary>\n\n        <div class=\"fl-gutenberg-byline-toggle-content\">\n            <p><em>The last updated date refers to the last time this article was reviewed by FindLaw or one of our <a href=\"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/company\/our-team\/contributing-authors.html\" rel=\"noopener\">contributing authors<\/a>. We make every effort to keep our articles updated. For information regarding a specific legal issue affecting you, please <a href=\"https:\/\/lawyers.findlaw.com\/?fli=bylinelink\" rel=\"noopener\">contact an attorney in your area<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n        <\/div>\n    <\/details>\n<\/section>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"rxbodyfield\" xmlns:o=\"urn:www.microsoft.com\/office\" xmlns:st1=\"urn:www.microsoft.com\/smarttags\" xmlns:w=\"urn:www.microsoft.com\/word\" xmlns:x=\"urn:www.microsoft.com\/excel\"><p>Petitioner, who was convicted of murdering his ex-wife and dismembering her body, sought habeas corpus relief on the grounds that the in-court identification of him by a witness was tainted by a prior photographic identification in violation of his constitutional rights. The district court denied the petition, finding that the pretrial photographic identification was not &quot;impermissibly suggestive.&quot; The court applied a factor analysis including: (i) the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime; (ii) the witness&#39; degree of attention; (iii) the accuracy of the witness&#39; prior description of the criminal; (iv) the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation; and (v) the length of time between the crime and the confrontation. In applying these factors, the court found that there was no &quot;substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.&quot; The witness was only twelve feet away from the abduction of the victim; he was &quot;100% sure&quot; of his identification; he had seen the ex-wife previously; he viewed the abduction scene for 20 to 40 seconds; he had described Petitioner accurately before being shown his photograph; only two weeks had elapsed between the crime and the photo identification.<\/p><p><u>Kado v Adams<\/u>, Civ No. 96-CV-40449 FL, ED Mich., 8\/6\/97, Gadola, J. (dkt #48 &#8211; 12 pages) This article was written by Mark A. Goldsmith, a partner in our Litigation Department, and previously appeared in the October 1997 edition of the Michigan Bar Journal.<\/p><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Petitioner, who was convicted of murdering his ex-wife and dismembering her body, sought habeas corpus relief on the grounds that the in-court identification of him by a witness was tainted by a prior photographic identification in violation of his &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_stopmodifiedupdate":true,"_modified_date":"","_cloudinary_featured_overwrite":false},"corporate_categories":[6529,6520,6530],"class_list":["post-36564","corporate","type-corporate","status-publish","hentry","corporate_categories-litigation-disputes__criminal-litigation","corporate_categories-litigation-disputes","corporate_categories-litigation-disputes__criminal-litigation__other-business-crime"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/corporate\/36564","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/corporate"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/corporate"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36564"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"corporate_categories","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/corporate_categories?post=36564"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}