After suppressing out-of-court identifications as unduly suggestive, the court found there was an independent source for the victim's in-court identification. That finding was amply supported by the evidence elicited at the hearing that the victim had seen appellant in school on three earlier occasions on the day he was attacked, and had been able to observe both "distinguishing" marks on one side of appellant's neck and his unusual hairstyle on those occasions, as well as...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
