skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 82932 Find in a Library
Title: Prior Identification in Criminal Cases - Hearsay and Confrontation Issues
Journal: Arizona Law Review  Volume:24  Issue:1  Dated:(1982)  Pages:29-59
Author(s): T A Mauet
Date Published: 1982
Page Count: 31
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article analyzes the admissibility of prior identifications as evidence, with particular emphasis on the hearsay and confrontation issues which arise from the use of various methods of identification used during investigation and trial.
Abstract: Prior identifications of offenders have been admissible in criminal cases for many years. With increasing legislative acceptance of prior identifications as a hearsay exception, the principal focus of the courts turned to the reliability of the pretrial identification procedures themselves. In recent years, new police techniques in the identification area have broadened the types of prior identifications that may be offered at trial. Acceptable pretrial procedures now include lineups, photographic arrays, other sensory identifications, artist sketches, and composite identification systems. The number of reported cases discussing hearsay aspects of sketches and composites is small, and the case law diverges widely in its treatment of such evidence. In addition, case law on the admissibility of corroborating testimony is inconsistent. The Supreme Court has never decided a confrontation clause issue in a prior identification setting. It is suggested that the varying types and sources of prior identification evidence should be analyzed in terms of the purposes of the hearsay rule, the parameters of the prior identification exception to that rule, and the requirements of the confrontation clause. The article includes 183 footnotes.
Index Term(s): Criminal proceedings; Defendants; Hearsay evidence; Offenders; Right to confront witnesses; Rights of the accused; Suspect identification
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.