State v. Engle

A suggestive identification can be combated with cross-examination and a trial court is not required to exclude the identification.

Defendant appealed his conviction for assault in the second degree, and assigned error to the court's admission of a photograph into evidence that violated the prohibition against improperly suggestive identifications. The photograph was of Defendant wearing jail-issued clothing. At trial the state called a witness to identify the men who committed the assault, but the witness could not remember their faces or names. After the state was allowed to show her the photo of Defendant, she remembered his face. Defendant argued that the court erred by admitting the photograph into evidence in violation of the prohibition against improperly suggestive identifications described in State v. Lawson/James, 352 Or 724, 291 P.3d 673 (2012). The Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Defendant’s cross-examination could adequately address issues raised by the witness’s identification. Affirmed.