United States v. James E. York
This text of 440 F.2d 252 (United States v. James E. York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
On the first appeal in this case, we remanded to the District Court for an appropriate determination as to whether there was an independent source for appellant’s in-trial identification by the Government’s principal witness. 1 On the remand, the District Court held an evidentiary hearing and, as delineated in its written opinion, 2 concluded that there was, 3 and that the witness’ pre-arrest photographic identifications of appellant satisfied due process standards. 4 The record amply supports the District Court’s rulings, and for the reasons set forth in its opinion the order now appealed from is
Affirmed.
. United States v. York, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 197, 199, 426 F.2d 1191, 1193 (1969).
. United States v. York, 321 F.Supp. 539 (D.D.C.1970).
. See United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 240-241, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967) ; United States v. Kemper, 140 U.S.App.D.C. 47, 433 F.2d 1153 (1970).
. See Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 382-386, 88 S.Ct. 967, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247 (1968).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
440 F.2d 252, 142 U.S. App. D.C. 224, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12030, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-james-e-york-cadc-1971.