United States v. Miguel Bautista and Tony Rodriguez Perez, Luis R. Minier-Contreras

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that presentation of suspect at scene in handcuffs and in police custody shortly after raid was not unnecessarily suggestive; noting that such immediate identifications serve a useful purpose and are necessary under some circumstances
• observing that \prosecutors should avoid statements suggesting that the defense is `obligated' at any time `to come forward with evidence'\
• observing that “prosecutors should avoid statements suggesting that the defense is ‘obligated’ at any time ‘to come forward with evidence’ ”
• concluding slightly brighter and more close-up photograph did not render photographic array more suggestive; the differences “would hardly suggest to an identifying witness that [the defendant] was more likely to be the culprit”
• rejecting claim that photographic array was unduly suggestive where “the photograph of [the defendant] was brighter and somewhat more close-up than the other five photographs in the array”
• affirming admission of on-scene show-up identification finding that “[t]he fact that the suspects were handcuffed, in the custody of law enforcement officers, and illuminated by flashlights also did not render the pretrial identification procedure unnecessarily suggestive”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).