United States v. House, No. 15-1175 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court concluded that the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress photographic identification evidence because the district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous. The district court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress the witness’s identification of defendant in the photographic lineup where the mere fact that defendant is the only individual pictured with a ponytail does not render the photographic lineup unduly suggestive. In this case, the show-up with a witness to the incident was not unduly suggestive and there is no substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Shepherd, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Smith, Circuit Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law. The mere fact that defendant was the only individual with a ponytail in the photo array shown to a witness did not make the photo lineup unduly suggestive, and the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress; show-up with witness to the incident was not unduly suggestive, and there was little chance the witness misidentified defendant under the circumstances presented.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.