Opinion ID: 153600
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: In-Court Identification of Mr. Gutierrez by Royce England

Text: 10 Mr. England was also shown the photographic lineup discussed above and was able to identify Mr. Gutierrez. Although the court ruled that the photo lineup was impermissibly suggestive, the court allowed Mr. England to identify Mr. Gutierrez in court because it believed that the identification was otherwise sufficiently reliable. Mr. Gutierrez argues that the photo lineup tainted Mr. England's identification and that the identification was not otherwise reliable. 11 Despite an impermissibly suggestive photo lineup, the court may still allow an in-court identification if the witness's testimony is otherwise reliable given the totality of the circumstances. Grubbs v. Hannigan, 982 F.2d 1483, 1490 (10th Cir.1993). In making this determination, the court should consider the following factors: 12 the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of his prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation. 13 Id. (quoting Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199-200 (1972)). Here, Mr. England had accurately described Mr. Gutierrez and had also testified that he had met Mr. Gutierrez on several occasions in good lighting conditions. Mr. England expressed certainty in his identification. Given these circumstances, the district court did not err when it allowed Mr. England to identify Mr. Gutierrez.