Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-06214/USCOURTS-ca10-90-06214-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Attorney General
Appellee
Martin A. Eberhart
Appellant
Stephen W. Kaiser
Appellee

Document Text:

FILBD 

Urured Sratefi Coun ~ A~tpeals 

Tenth Ci:::cuir 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 2 2 1991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

MARTIN A. EBERHART, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v. 

STEPHEN W. KAISER, Warden, and 

ROBERT H. HENRY, Attorney General, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

.No. 90-6214 

(D.C. No. 90-419-B . (W.D. Okla.) 

Before ANDERSON, ~, and BRORBY Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has deter.mined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the deter.mination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); lOth Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Petitioner Martin Eberhart appeals from the district court's 

denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. He contends the 

court erred in refusing to find he was prejudiced by the state 

trial court's refusal to give a cautionary instruction 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. lOth Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-6214 Document: 01019728630 Date Filed: 02/22/1991 Page: 1 
concerning eyewitness identification and the admission of two 

witnesses' in-court identifications of petitioner. We affirm. 

Petitioner was convicted in Oklahoma state court of first 

degree rape, first degree burglary, and two counts of sodomy. 

These convictions were affirmed on appeal. Petitioner is 

currently serving his sentence in an Oklahoma state prison. 

The district court properly concluded petitioner was not 

prejudiced by the state trial court's refusal to give a cautionary 

instruction concerning eyewitness identifications. The trial 

court's action did not deprive petitioner of fundamental rights 

guaranteed by the constitution. Moreover, the evidence presented 

at trial and the instructions given to the jury sufficiently 

informed the jury of the limitations of eyewitness 

identifications. Petitioner has not shown the omission of the 

requested instruction "so infected the entire trial that the 

resulting conviction violated due process." Henderson~ Kibbe, 

431 u.s. 145, 156-57 (1977). 

Petitioner was not prejudiced by the admission of the incourt identifications of petitioner by the victim and a 

prosecution witness. The victim failed to identify petitioner in 

a physical lineup two days after the offenses. She did, however, 

pick out petitioner when she was shown a photo array. We agree 

with the district court's conclusion that this array was not 

impermi ssibly suggestive . We therefore need not determine if the 

identification was unreliable in view of the totality of the 

circumstances. Johnston~ Makowski, 823 F.2d 387, 391 (lOth Cir. 

1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1026 (1988). Witness O'Banion 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-6214 Document: 01019728630 Date Filed: 02/22/1991 Page: 2 
failed to pick out petitioner when shown a photo array and did not 

identify petitioner at the preliminary hearing. Both the victim 

and O'Banion identified petiti oner at trial . The jury was fully 

informed that both witnesses had previously failed to identify 

petitioner. We agree with the district court's conclusion that 

petitioner was not denied a fundamentally fair trial . 

Petiti oner has made a substantial showi ng of the denial of 

important federal rights and we therefore grant the certificate of 

probable cause. See Barefoot~ Estelle, 463 u.s. BOO (1983). We 

deny petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, but waive 

the fees and reach the merits of this appeal. We AFFIRM the order 

of the district court. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Oeanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-6214 Document: 01019728630 Date Filed: 02/22/1991 Page: 3