No More Worries!

Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay

Paper Formatting

Double or single-spaced
1-inch margin
12 Font Arial or Times New Roman
300 words per page

No Lateness!

Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay

Our Guarantees

Free Unlimited revisions
Guaranteed Privacy
Money Return guarantee
Plagiarism Free Writing

The rights to counsel and to due process apply in lineups, showups, and photographic identification

The rights to counsel and to due process apply in lineups, showups, and photographic identification, but the rights to protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and self-incrimination do not. Discuss the reasoning as to why the Court applies the first two but not the last two. Does the Court's reasoning make sense? Discuss why it makes sense.
In Neil v. Biggers (1972) the Court determined that identification procedures must be fair. To determine whether the procedures were fair, courts must consider all the circumstances leading to the identification. Discuss what circumstances should be considered in determining fairness. Why are these circumstances important in determining the fairness of an identification procedure?

Full Answer Section

Right Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures:

Not Directly Applicable:The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures of physical evidence. Lineups, showups, and photographic identifications don't involve physically taking something from the suspect. The suspect is simply asked to identify someone or something.

Right Against Self-Incrimination:

Silence vs. Identification:The Fifth Amendment protects against the government compelling a person to incriminate themselves. Identification procedures don't require the suspect to speak or confess. They are simply asked to view a lineup or photos and say if they recognize someone.

Does the Court's Reasoning Make Sense? The Court's reasoning makes sense because it focuses on the specific rights involved. The right to counsel and due process ensure a fair identification procedure, which is crucial for preventing wrongful convictions. The other two amendments are not directly applicable to the act of identification itself. Fairness in Identification Procedures (Neil v. Biggers) In Neil v. Biggers (1972), the Supreme Court established the "totality of the circumstances" test to determine the fairness of identification procedures. Here are some circumstances courts consider:

Suggestiveness of the Procedure:Was the suspect singled out in any way? Was the lineup balanced in terms of race and appearance?
Opportunity to View:Did the witness have a good opportunity to see the perpetrator during the crime? How long did they see them? Under what lighting conditions?
Witness's Certainty:How confident is the witness in their identification? Did their certainty change over time?
Prior Descriptions:Did the witness provide a description of the perpetrator before the identification procedure? Did the identification match that description?

Importance of These Circumstances: These circumstances are important because they can influence the accuracy of an eyewitness identification. Suggestive procedures can lead witnesses to misidentify someone, even if they are genuinely trying to be accurate. Considering these factors helps the court determine if the identification procedure was so unfair that it would deny the defendant due process. By focusing on fairness and considering all the circumstances, the Court aims to ensure that eyewitness identifications are reliable and don't lead to wrongful convictions.

Sample Answer

The rights to counsel and due process apply in lineups, showups, and photographic identifications, while the protections against unreasonable searches and seizures and self-incrimination do not. Here's the reasoning behind this distinction:

Right to Counsel and Due Process:

Focus on Reliability: The Sixth Amendment right to counsel ensures the accused has legal representation during critical stages of a criminal prosecution. Identification procedures can significantly impact the outcome of a trial. An unfair lineup or showup can lead to misidentification, a fundamental violation of due process. Having an attorney present helps ensure the fairness of the procedure and protects against suggestive tactics.