United States v. James E. York

440 F.2d 252, 142 U.S. App. D.C. 224, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12030

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

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.

1 . United States v. York, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 197, 199, 426 F.2d 1191, 1193 (1969).

2 . United States v. York, 321 F.Supp. 539 (D.D.C.1970).

3 . 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).

4 . See Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 382-386, 88 S.Ct. 967, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247 (1968).