United States v. Limantour

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that pre-trial identification procedure was unduly suggestive but finding no due process violation because identification was nevertheless reliable under the totality of the circumstances
• noting that a reversal does not automatically following from a suggestive identification procedure — the court would also have to consider whether the identification itself was reliable
• highlighting that the function and purpose of the motion dictates which rules apply
• applying the two-fold test for determining whether an identification procedure is so suggestive as to violate the defendant’s due process rights
• where trial court denied a defendant’s motion on mistaken ground, “[t]o determine if the error is harmless, this Court considers whether the Superior Court could have properly denied [the] motion on the merits” based on the record

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).