Articles on eyewitness identification

Last week, the court of appeals reversed a defendant’s conviction for first-degree murder. That doesn’t happen every day, so let’s unpack the case. The central issue concerns two eyewitnesses’ in-court identifications of the defendant.

Live and photo lineups and show-ups implicate constitutional and statutory requirements. This post will focus on the statutory requirements. For constitutional requirements, see pages 594-98 in Arrest, Search, and Investigation in North Carolina (5th ed. 2016).

This post addresses three recurrent issues concerning eyewitness identification:

1. When, if at all, is expert testimony about eyewitness identification admissible?
2. When, if at all, is an indigent defendant entitled to funds with which to hire an expert on eyewitness identification?
3. May jury instructions, rather than expert testimony, be used to inform the jury about factors relevant to the accuracy of an eyewitness identification?