Manson v. Brathwaite

Last updated
Manson v. Brathwaite
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 29, 1976
Decided June 16, 1977
Full case nameJohn R. Manson, Commissioner of Correction of Connecticut v. Nowell A. Brathwaite
Citations432 U.S. 98 ( more )
97 S.Ct. 2243
Argument Oral argument
Opinion announcement Opinion announcement
Case history
Prior527 F.2d 363 (2d Cir. 1975)
Questions presented
Do the 14th and 6th Amendments require the exclusion from a state criminal trial of pretrial identification evidence that is both suggestive and unnecessary?
Holding
No. The admission of the evidence did not violate the 14th Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun  · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist  · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
MajorityBlackmun, joined by Burger, Stewart, White, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens
ConcurrenceStevens
DissentMarshall, joined by Brennan
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV, U.S. Const. amend. VI

Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1977. [1] The decision touched on the exclusionary rule in state criminal proceedings. [1]

Contents

The Supreme Court held that the identification procedures used against Brathwaite did not violate the Constitution of the United States. [1]

Background

On May 5, 1970, Jimmy Glover of the Connecticut State Police went to an apartment building in Hartford with an informant, Henry Brown. [2] The two had planned to buy drugs from "Dickie Boy" Cicero. [3] They completed the purchase and, in doing so, Glover saw the seller's face through the apartment doorway. [2] The pair left, and Glover went back to his station, where he described the seller to two other officers, D'Onofrio and Gaffey. [1] [4] On hearing the description, D'Onofrio believed that the description matched Brathwaite. [1] D'Onofrio sourced Brathwaite's picture from the police records and left it at Glover's office. [3] Glover then viewed the picture alone and positively identified Brathwaite as the person that had sold him the drugs. Brathwaite was arrested on July 27, 1970. [3]

At his trial, the picture that Glover had used to make the positive identification was admitted into evidence without objection. [1] The prosecution did not explain why the police did not use a photographic lineup to make the identification. [3] Brathwaite testified in his own defense that he had been sick and stuck in his own apartment on May 5. [1] His wife and doctor corroborated this testimony. [2] Indeed, Brathwaite had surgery for a herniated disc. [1]

The jury found Brathwaite guilty, and he was sentenced to 6–9 years in prison. [2] His conviction was affirmed by the Connecticut Supreme Court in 1973. [5] Brathwaite sought and did not receive federal habeas corpus relief in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. [3] He appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which reversed, holding that the photograph should have been excluded. [3] The Supreme Court granted certiorari in 1976 (425 U.S. 957). [6]

Decision

In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Second Circuit. [7] Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the majority and reasoned that the law should strive to balance evidentiary reliability, deterrence of overreaching by the police, and the efficiency of the justice system. [1] In balancing these three, he placed emphasis on the importance of reliable evidence in criminal proceedings. As such, the majority ruled that the appropriate factors to consider were those set out in Neil v. Biggers :

"These include the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of his prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated at the confrontation, and the time between the crime and the confrontation. Against these factors is to be weighed the corrupting effect of the suggestive identification itself." – Justice Blackmun, Manson v. Brathwaite 432 U.S. 98, 114 (1977). [3]

Applying the factors, the Court determined that the probative value of the evidence likely outweighed any prejudicial effect from its admission. [1] The majority found that there was no "substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. [2] "

Aftermath

The Brathwaite test has been criticized as being out of step with scientific research into eyewitness reliability. [8]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comstock Act of 1873</span> United States anti-obscenity law

The Comstock Act refers to a series of current provisions in Federal law, that generally criminalize the involvement of the United States Postal Service, its officers, or a common carrier in conveying obscene matter, crime-inciting matter, or certain abortion-related matter. The Comstock Act is largely codified across title 18 of the United States Code and was enacted beginning in 1872 with the attachment of an off-topic rider to a postal service reconsolidation bill. Amended multiple times since initial enactment, with it amended most recently in 1996, the act is nonetheless often associated with U.S. Postal Inspector and anti-vice activist Anthony Comstock.

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that U.S. state laws criminalizing sodomy between consenting adults are unconstitutional. The Court reaffirmed the concept of a "right to privacy" that earlier cases had found the U.S. Constitution provides, even though it is not explicitly enumerated. It based its ruling on the notions of personal autonomy to define one's own relationships and of American traditions of non-interference with any or all forms of private sexual activities between consenting adults.

Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace.

In United States and Canadian law, competence concerns the mental capacity of an individual to participate in legal proceedings or transactions, and the mental condition a person must have to be responsible for his or her decisions or acts. Competence is an attribute that is decision-specific. Depending on various factors which typically revolve around mental function integrity, an individual may or may not be competent to make a particular medical decision, a particular contractual agreement, to execute an effective deed to real property, or to execute a will having certain terms.

Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979), was a Supreme Court case holding that the installation and use of a pen register by the police to obtain information on a suspect's telephone calls was not a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and hence no search warrant was required. In the majority opinion, Justice Harry Blackmun rejected the idea that the installation and use of a pen register constitutes a violation of the suspect's reasonable expectation of privacy since the telephone numbers would be available to and recorded by the phone company anyway.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ronald L. Buckwalter</span> American judge (born 1936)

Ronald Lawrence Buckwalter is an inactive senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.

In eyewitness identification, in criminal law, evidence is received from a witness "who has actually seen an event and can so testify in court".

Judicial misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct.

Coates v. City of Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611 (1971), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a local city ordinance that made it a criminal offense for three or more persons to assemble on a sidewalk and "annoy" any passersby was unconstitutionally vague. Dennis Coates participated in a protest along with four other unnamed students, all of whom were convicted of violating the city ordinance. Coates appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which upheld the conviction. However, this conviction was overturned in the divided United States Supreme Court decision. The Court found that the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague and violated the First Amendment freedom of assembly.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Victim Rights Law Center</span> American non-profit organization

The Victim Rights Law Center (VRLC) is a non-profit organization that provides free legal services to victims of rape and sexual assault in Massachusetts and Oregon. Established in 2003, it became the first nonprofit law center in the United States solely dedicated to serving the legal needs of sexual assault victims. The VRLC mission is to "provide legal representation to victims of rape and sexual assault to help rebuild their lives and to promote a national movement committed to seeking justice for every rape and sexual assault victim." VRLC also seeks to transform the legal response to sexual assault in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gary L. Wells</span>

Gary L. Wells is an American psychologist and a scholar in eyewitness memory research. Wells is a professor at Iowa State University with a research interest in the integration of both cognitive psychology and social psychology and its interface with law. He has conducted research on lineup procedures, reliability and accuracy of eyewitness identification. Wells has received many awards and honorary degrees, and he has gained recognition for his work and contributions to psychology and criminal justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Albert G. Lauber</span> American judge (born 1950)

Albert George Lauber is an American lawyer who serves as a senior judge of the United States Tax Court.

Lisa J. Steele is a game designer and an attorney.

Carter v. Kentucky was a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that trial judges in criminal proceedings must, upon proper request of the defendant, inform the jury of his right against self-incrimination, and that its execution may not be used against him.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dana Douglas</span> American judge (born 1975)

Dana Marie Douglas is an American attorney who is a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. She previously served as a United States magistrate judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Julie Rikelman</span> Ukrainian-American judge (born 1972)

Julie Rikelman is a Ukrainian-born American lawyer who is serving as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. She represented the Mississippi abortion clinic in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the U.S. Supreme Court case that overturned the constitutional right to abortion.

<i>North Haven Bd. of Educ. v. Bell</i> US Supreme Court case

North Haven Bd. of Educ. v. Bell, 456 U.S. 512 (1982), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision where the Court ruled that Title IX protections against sex-based discrimination applied to school employees as well as students within a federal funded education setting. Critically, this decision was made in contrast to many previous court rulings on the application of Title IX to individuals other than students. The decision of North Haven Board of Education v. Bell ushered in an understanding of Title IX that protects anyone interacting with the school system including “parents and guardians, students, applicants and employees." The employee protection of Title IX extends to both full and part-time faculty, dictating that equal pay must be given to men and women for the same work.

Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 26, 1987. The court decided that the warrantless search of a probationer's residence based on "reasonable grounds" in accordance with a state probation regulation did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1972. The case concerned the reliability of a police lineup.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 "Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 "John R. MANSON, Commissioner of Correction of Connecticut, Petitioner, v. Nowell A. BRATHWAITE". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
  4. ↑ Weinberg, Steve (2012-11-27). "Seeing Is Believing". The American Prospect. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
  5. ↑ "State v. Brathwaite, 164 Conn. 617 | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
  6. ↑ Putzel, Jr., Henry, ed. (1978). United States Reports. Vol. 425. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. p. 957.
  7. ↑ "Manson v. Brathwaite". Oyez. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
  8. ↑ "NACDL - Confronting the Problems of Manson v. Brathwaite". NACDL - National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Retrieved 2024-01-06.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.