October Term 2011 · Docket 10-8974
Does Due Process Exclude Suggestive Eyewitness Identifications Without Police Manipulation?
The dispute centers on whether the Constitution requires courts to exclude eyewitness identifications that are suggestive but not arranged by police.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Richard Guerriero argued that suggestive identifications present a unique danger of misidentification.
He stated this danger implicates due process and requires a reliability evaluation.
Justice Scalia questioned whether the rule treats prosecution and defense evidence equally.
He asked why eyewitness identification receives special treatment compared to other evidence types.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-35 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-11
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of due process protections for eyewitness testimony. The core issue is whether police involvement is a prerequisite for constitutional scrutiny of identification reliability.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 2, 2011.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the court to exclude the identification because it was suggestive and unreliable.
The state wants the court to admit the identification because police did not manipulate the witness.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues suggestive identifications create a unique danger of misidentification that requires a reliability review.
The state argues due process applies only when police arrange a confrontation and use unnecessarily suggestive techniques.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if the rule excludes unreliable defense testimony in the same way it excludes prosecution testimony.
Justice Scalia asked why unreliable eyewitness identification differs from other unreliable evidence in criminal cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-35 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-11
Why it matters
This case defines the constitutional limits on eyewitness evidence. It determines when courts must screen identifications for reliability. The outcome shapes criminal trial procedures nationwide. It affects the balance between accurate convictions and procedural fairness.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 9-35 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 9-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-11
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 5-29 — Transcript, file page 42, lines 5-29
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.