The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
Presentation/PPT
27/08/2022
100 word response 1 reference due 9/24/2023
Puck
1. Mistaken eyewitness testimony is the single largest contributing factor to wrongful convictions. Pre-trial procedures utilized by law enforcement are not necessarily subject to suppression even when the procedures are considered “unnecessarily suggestive.”
a. Discuss eyewitness procedure reforms and include an argument for and against the reforms. Using one of the cases from the text as an example, explain how implementation of the reform(s) would have resolved the defense’s concerns.
Eyewitness procedure reforms are set in place in order to decrease the event that someone could be wrongly identified as a perpetrator. When a witness is asked to identify their attacker, the first reform is to only have one suspect in the line up in order to prevent added confusion for the victim. I find that it makes sense to have this reform in place because it can definitely cause mass confusion to the victim and potentially make them unable to identify anyone or even the wrong person. Other reforms include to not have the suspect stand out in any lineup whether it is live or just a photo, to have law enforcement explain that they suspect could potentially not even be in the lineup, or a double-blind testing protocol where both parties do not know who they suspect is. In the case Manson v. Brathwaite, after a description of the suspect was given from one police officer to another, they did one of the things that should not be done when trying to get someone to identify someone. It was said that “He obtained a single photograph of respondent from police files and left it at Glover’s office. Two days later, while alone, Glover viewed the photograph and identified it as that of the seller” (Israel, 2022). By only having the single photo, it caused concern for the validity of the identification, which is definitely justified. It was said that “Under Biggers and Brathwaite, the first step in the due process analysis is to consider whether police utilized an identification procedure that was unnecessarily or impermissibly suggestive” (Findley, 2016). If these reforms that were created were implemented in many previous cases, it could have potentially prevented false identification of suspects and their convictions.
b. What must the defense establish to successfully suppress a suggestive identification? Use cases as examples.
The defense must establish the certainty that “A pretrial identification violating the accused’s right to counsel” is inadmissible in the absence of a waiver” (Gilligan, 1972). Basically, if the witness was subjected to a pretrial identification that was not done according to the proper reform policies, a motion to suppress the identification can be requested for the trial. For example, the case United States v. Wade, a motion to suppress the identification was submitted since the witness identified Wade in a lineup and later was asked in the courtroom if the perpetrator was in the room. Although Wade was originally convicted, “The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial at which the in-court identification evidence was to be excluded, holding that [conducting the lineup in the absence of Wade’s appointed counsel violated his Sixth Amendment rights]” (Israel, 2022). In every case that involves eyewitness identification, it is imperative that it is completed the right way in order to prevent any possible issues during the trial. Another case that had to do with trying to suppress a suggestive identification is Kirby v. Illinois. In this case it had to do with police officers not using the proper identification procedures when questioning and identifying their suspects.
c. Despite the arguments in favor of eyewitness identification reform, is law enforcement motivated to implement such reforms when suppression is not ordinarily a viable option for the defense?
Most law enforcement are motivated to implement these reforms because it is the proper way to handle eyewitness identification. Even if suppression is not a viable option for the defense, most individuals in law enforcement want to do right by the process. Although, there are always the select few officers who do not want to follow the reforms and close the case with improper identification in order to move to the next situation. It would most likely tie the case up in a big red bow and send the defendant away to serve time that they may not have deserved.
2. How did the Court in United States v. Salerno reason that the Bail Reform Act of 1984, of which permitted pre-trial detention without bail, was consistent with the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against “excessive bail?” How does pre-trial detention adversely impact the defendant’s ability to prepare a defense, and in what ways does pre-trial detention impact society?
The court in United States v. Salerno, reasoned that the Bail Reform Act of 1984 was consistent with the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against excessive bail by specifically stating that “First, they rely upon the Court of Appeals’ conclusion that the Act exceeds the limitations placed upon the Federal Government by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Second, they contend that the Act contravenes the Eighth Amendment’s proscription against excessive bail” (Israel, 2022). In further explanation, this case mentions the due process clause and how it also ties with the Bail Reform Act of 1984. Excessive bail is essentially setting the bail for an individual well above their means for an unequal crime. The pre-trial detention was not made to punish individuals before trial, but “Congress instead perceived pretrial detention as a potential solution to a pressing societal problem” (Israel, 2022). With the pre-trial detention, it impacts the defendant’s ability to prepare a defense by the chance that they could lose their means of affording counsel, which can make them be stuck with a public defender. A defendant being in pre-trial detention can impact society by not only increasing their chances of being found guilty, but also harming their livelihood. For example, someone could lose their home or stability, or even get behind on bills. It can affect those around the defendant and even cause severe issues in society. Some may say they want a defendant to be held before trial based on what they are being accused of, which could make sense sometimes.
The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more