Opinion ID: 1571058
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Motion to Suppress Lineup Identifications

Text: McLean first claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress photographic and live lineup identifications because law enforcement did not offer assistance of counsel. We disagree. Here, the trial court's ruling on the motion to suppress was proper. Because both the photographic and live lineups occurred before any charges were filed against McLean, they were not critical stages of proceedings and did not trigger a right to counsel. See Ibar v. State, 938 So.2d 451, 469-70 (Fla.2006) (The pre-arrest investigatory lineup ... was not a `critical stage' of the proceedings because when the lineup was conducted, it was not apparent that the government had decided to prosecute [the defendant]....). Because McLean was not entitled to the presence of counsel during these investigatory lineups, his rights were not violated when law enforcement failed to offer assistance of counsel. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's denial of McLean's motion to suppress the results of the lineup identifications.