Maia v. Lamport & Holt, Ltd.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• declining to create constitutional rule of exclusion to cases where identification results from suggestive conduct by private citizen
• ‘‘we do not rule out the possibility that a court, in balancing probative value against prejudicial effect, may find some [eyewitness identification] testimony so unrelia- ble that it is inadmissible’’
• ‘‘we do not rule on the possibility that a court, in balancing probative value against prejudicial effect, may find some [identification testimony tainted by unduly suggestive private conduct] so unreliable that it is inadmissible’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).