Niblett v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• holding evidence of extrajudicial identification admissible to overcome deficiencies in courtroom identification where identification witness available for cross-examination
• noting (a) trend in other states to admit extra-judicial identifications made by witnesses available for cross-examination at trial as independent evidence of identity and (b) “agree[ment] with the reasoning of those courts”
• admitting evidence of one witness’ pretrial i.d. of defendant, even though that witness was unable to make “even a weak in-court [i.d.],” “for the purpose of overcoming . . . deficiencies” in second witness’ in-court i.d., which had been challenged on cross-examination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).