Court Opinion

ID: 9885167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 03:35:05.663997+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:45.047313
License: Public Domain

Concurring opinion by
Justice JOHNSTONE.
Because I agree with Justice Stumbo’s analysis of the identification issues in this case, but disagree with her conclusions based on that analysis, I concur in the majority opinion in result only.
I agree completely with Justice Stumbo that the trial court should have suppressed Ross’s in-court identification of King. But I disagree with her conclusion that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Ross was neither the only person, *652nor the only cashier to identify King. Cashier Carnes identified King, and both the dissent and the majority’s opinion agree that there was no error in her in-court identification. Further, the police officer investigating the case, who was familiar with King, positively identified King from the video tape of the transactions in question. And, finally, all three cashiers identified King’s hat and coat, which he was wearing on the video tape.