Court Opinion

ID: 9569829
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:17:53.624563+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:04:08.635434
License: Public Domain

CLARK, J.
I dissent.
Assuming arguendo that defendant would not have consented to returning three blocks to the crime scene, what alternatives do the majority offer? “The officers may call or escort the witness to the detention scene for an immediate viewing of the suspect, or if they are able to procure satisfactory identification from the suspect, arrangements *393may be made for a subsequent confrontation with the witness.” (Ante, p. 391.)
It is doubtful whether defendant—reasonably suspected of committing a felony and of then lying to the police about his involvement—could reasonably have been expected to honor a mere promise to appear for a subsequent confrontation with his victims.
On the other hand, immediate confrontation at the crime scene had the following advantages: The victims’ memories were fresh. The conditions of initial observation could be reproduced. Defendant and his companion had not had time to intimidate their victims. Further, defendant had not had time to shave off his moustache or to change his light cardigan sweater and dark trousers or, more importantly, his distinctive ripple-soled shoes. Finally, had he been innocent, his innocence could have been established immediately.
The majority’s other alternative—making the victims come to defendant—is unacceptable. The victim’s rights should be valued at least as highly as a suspected felon’s.1
I would affirm the judgment.
McComb, J., concurred.

In addition it must be asked whether those infringements upon the suspect’s freedom which the majority proposes to avoid will only be increased by such procedure. While victims are being transported, considerations of convenience and safety for the detaining officers will reasonably require the suspect be placed in physical custody, either handcuffed in the back of a police unit or held at the nearest police station. A second available police unit must be located and dispatched to the victim’s residence, then returned to the suspect’s place of detention. Thus, in terms of both manner and length of detention, the degree to which the freedom of a suspect is infringed will equal, if not exceed, that resulting from transporting the suspect to the victim.