43 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Neil v. Biggersgreen2 sentences2020In so doing, a trial court must engage in “a two-step inquiry for allegations of an impermissible identification: (1) the court must 6 first determine whether the identification was unduly suggestive; if that inquiry is answered affirmatively, then (2) the court must determine whether, under the totality of the circumstances and using the five Biggers factors, the identification was nevertheless reliable.” Id. 2017To evaluate the likelihood of misidentification, the trial court must consider the Biggers factors: “the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness’ degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness’ prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.” Id, (quoting Biggers , 409 U.S, at 199, 93 S.Ct. 375 ). ¶ 7. | 7 | 25 |
York v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Rather, if such an 8 objection is raised, the trial judge must consider the evidence and the Biggers factors and make a preliminary finding of fact as to whether, “considering the totality of the circumstances,” the identification procedures created “a very substantial likelihood of misidentification.” Id. at 671-72 (¶¶8-9) (quoting Roche v. State, 913 So. 2d 306, 311 (¶14) (Miss. 2005)). “[A]n accused who seeks to exclude identification testimony based upon an alleged due process violation faces a very heavy burden.” Id. at 673 (¶15) (quoting York v. State, 413 So. 2d 1372, 1384 (Miss. 1982)) 2019The Mississippi Supreme Court adopted the Biggers test in York v. State, 413 So. 2d 1372, 1382 (Miss 1982). ¶20. | 7 | 8 |
Fleming v. Stategreen2 sentences2020It is well-settled that “an objection on one or more specific grounds constitutes a waiver of all other grounds.” Fleming v. State, 604 So.2d 280, 292 (Miss. 1992); accord, e.g., Whittaker v. State, 262 So. 3d 531, 534 (¶¶10-12) (Miss. 2019). 2020It is well-settled that “an objection on one or more specific grounds constitutes a waiver of all other grounds.” Fleming v. State, 604 So.2d 280, 292 (Miss. 1992); accord, e.g., Whittaker v. State, 262 So. 3d 531, 534 (¶¶10-12) (Miss. 2019). | 5 | 5 |
Gayten v. Stategreen2 sentences2007The Biggers factors may then be used "to determine whether the in-court identification is sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification." Ellis v. State, 667 So.2d 599, 605 (Miss.1995) (quoting Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992)). ¶ 22. 2007The Biggers factors may then be used "to determine whether the in-court identification is sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification." Ellis v. State, 667 So.2d 599, 605 (Miss.1995) (quoting Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992)). ¶ 22. | 5 | 5 |
Roche v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Rather, if such an 8 objection is raised, the trial judge must consider the evidence and the Biggers factors and make a preliminary finding of fact as to whether, “considering the totality of the circumstances,” the identification procedures created “a very substantial likelihood of misidentification.” Id. at 671-72 (¶¶8-9) (quoting Roche v. State, 913 So. 2d 306, 311 (¶14) (Miss. 2005)). “[A]n accused who seeks to exclude identification testimony based upon an alleged due process violation faces a very heavy burden.” Id. at 673 (¶15) (quoting York v. State, 413 So. 2d 1372, 1384 (Miss. 1982)) 2009The five Biggers factors are “the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness’ degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness’ prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.” Roche, 913 So.2d at 311 (quoting Biggers, 409 U.S. at 199-200 , 93 S.Ct. 375 ). ¶ 26. | 3 | 7 |
Jones v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Wilson v. State, 574 So.2d 1324, 1327 (Miss.1990) (citing Jones v. State, 504 So.2d 1196, 1199 (Miss. 1987)). 2007Wilson v. State, 574 So.2d 1324, 1327 (Miss.1990) (citing Jones v. State, 504 So.2d 1196, 1199 (Miss. 1987)). | 3 | 3 |
Ellis v. Stategreen2 sentences2007The Biggers factors may then be used "to determine whether the in-court identification is sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification." Ellis v. State, 667 So.2d 599, 605 (Miss.1995) (quoting Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992)). ¶ 22. 2007The Biggers factors may then be used "to determine whether the in-court identification is sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification." Ellis v. State, 667 So.2d 599, 605 (Miss.1995) (quoting Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992)). ¶ 22. | 2 | 6 |
Wilson v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Wilson v. State, 574 So.2d 1324, 1327 (Miss.1990) (citing Jones v. State, 504 So.2d 1196, 1199 (Miss. 1987)). 2007Wilson v. State, 574 So.2d 1324, 1327 (Miss.1990) (citing Jones v. State, 504 So.2d 1196, 1199 (Miss. 1987)). | 2 | 2 |
Manson v. Brathwaitegreen2 sentences2001York v. State, 413 So.2d 1372, 1382 (Miss.1982) relying on Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 , 97 S.Ct. 2243 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977)("[R]eliability is the linchpin in determining the admissibility [of out-of-court identifications]...."). ¶ 13. 2001York v. State, 413 So.2d 1372, 1382 (Miss.1982) relying on Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 , 97 S.Ct. 2243 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977)("[R]eliability is the linchpin in determining the admissibility [of out-of-court identifications]...."). ¶ 13. | 2 | 2 |
Foster v. Stategreen2 sentences1999The Biggers factors are only “evaluated with a view toward determining whether the testimony appears sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification.” Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992) (citing Foster v. State, 493 So.2d 1304 (Miss.1986); Poole v. State, 216 So.2d 425 (Miss.1968)). ¶ 21. 1999The Biggers factors are only “evaluated with a view toward determining whether the testimony appears sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification.” Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992) (citing Foster v. State, 493 So.2d 1304 (Miss.1986); Poole v. State, 216 So.2d 425 (Miss.1968)). ¶ 21. | 1 | 2 |
Whitlock v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Rather, if such an 8 objection is raised, the trial judge must consider the evidence and the Biggers factors and make a preliminary finding of fact as to whether, “considering the totality of the circumstances,” the identification procedures created “a very substantial likelihood of misidentification.” Id. at 671-72 (¶¶8-9) (quoting Roche v. State, 913 So. 2d 306, 311 (¶14) (Miss. 2005)). “[A]n accused who seeks to exclude identification testimony based upon an alleged due process violation faces a very heavy burden.” Id. at 673 (¶15) (quoting York v. State, 413 So. 2d 1372, 1384 (Miss. 1982)) | 1 | 1 |
Outerbridge v. Stategreen1 sentence2020And the trial judge’s findings on this issue will not be disturbed if they are supported by “substantial credible evidence.” Id. at 672 (¶8) (quoting Outerbridge v. State, 947 So. 2d 279, 282 (¶8) (Miss. 2006)). | 1 | 1 |
William Lee Whittaker, II v. State of Mississippigreen2 sentences2020It is well-settled that “an objection on one or more specific grounds constitutes a waiver of all other grounds.” Fleming v. State, 604 So.2d 280, 292 (Miss. 1992); accord, e.g., Whittaker v. State, 262 So. 3d 531, 534 (¶¶10-12) (Miss. 2019). 2020It is well-settled that “an objection on one or more specific grounds constitutes a waiver of all other grounds.” Fleming v. State, 604 So.2d 280, 292 (Miss. 1992); accord, e.g., Whittaker v. State, 262 So. 3d 531, 534 (¶¶10-12) (Miss. 2019). | 1 | 1 |
Howell v. Stategreen2 sentences2014The Howell I Court applied the Biggers factors and held that, “[u]nder the totality of the circumstances, there is no likelihood whatsoever, that Rice’s identification was not reliable.” Howell I, 860 So.2d at 730-31 (¶¶ 89-92) (discussing Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199 , 93 S.Ct. 375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972)). 2014The Howell I Court applied the Biggers factors and held that, “[u]nder the totality of the circumstances, there is no likelihood whatsoever, that Rice’s identification was not reliable.” Howell I, 860 So.2d at 730-31 (¶¶ 89-92) (discussing Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199 , 93 S.Ct. 375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972)). | 1 | 1 |
Christmas v. Stategreen2 sentences2012Id. at 419 (¶25) (citing Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199-200 , 93 S.Ct. 375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972)). 2012Id. at 419 (¶25) (citing Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199-200 , 93 S.Ct. 375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972)). | 1 | 1 |
McDowell v. Stategreen2 sentences2008McDowell v. State, 807 So.2d 413, 418-19 (¶ 12) (Miss.2001) (citing Biggers, 409 U.S. at 199 , 93 S.Ct. 375 ). 2008McDowell v. State, 807 So.2d 413, 418-19 (¶ 12) (Miss.2001) (citing Biggers, 409 U.S. at 199 , 93 S.Ct. 375 ). | 1 | 1 |
Guerrero v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Guerrero , 943 So.2d at 779 (¶ 12). ¶ 18. 2007Guerrero , 943 So.2d at 779 (¶ 12). ¶ 18. | 1 | 1 |
Hansen v. Stategreen2 sentences2007When a trial court determines that such testimony is reliable under the Biggers test, this Court will not reverse unless there is a lack of “substantial credible evidence supporting the trial judge’s findings.” Hansen v. State, 592 So. 2d 114, 138 (Miss. 1991) (quoting Nicholson v. State, 523 So. 2d 68, 71 (Miss. 1988)). ¶27. 2007When a trial court determines that such testimony is reliable under the Biggers test, this Court will not reverse unless there is a lack of “substantial credible evidence supporting the trial judge’s findings.” Hansen v. State, 592 So. 2d 114, 138 (Miss. 1991) (quoting Nicholson v. State, 523 So. 2d 68, 71 (Miss. 1988)). ¶27. | 1 | 1 |
Nicholson v. Stategreen2 sentences2007When a trial court determines that such testimony is reliable under the Biggers test, this Court will not reverse unless there is a lack of “substantial credible evidence supporting the trial judge’s findings.” Hansen v. State, 592 So. 2d 114, 138 (Miss. 1991) (quoting Nicholson v. State, 523 So. 2d 68, 71 (Miss. 1988)). ¶27. 2007When a trial court determines that such testimony is reliable under the Biggers test, this Court will not reverse unless there is a lack of “substantial credible evidence supporting the trial judge’s findings.” Hansen v. State, 592 So. 2d 114, 138 (Miss. 1991) (quoting Nicholson v. State, 523 So. 2d 68, 71 (Miss. 1988)). ¶27. | 1 | 1 |
Mason v. Stategreen2 sentences2003“Even though the pre-trial identification is impermissibly suggestive,” an in-court identification should only be excluded if the conduct, considered under the Biggers factors, “gave rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable mis-identifieation.” Mason v. State, 736 So.2d 1053, 1056 (¶ 9) (Miss.Ct.App.1999); see also York v. State, 413 So.2d 1372, 1384 (Miss.1982). ¶ 14. 2003“Even though the pre-trial identification is impermissibly suggestive,” an in-court identification should only be excluded if the conduct, considered under the Biggers factors, “gave rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable mis-identifieation.” Mason v. State, 736 So.2d 1053, 1056 (¶ 9) (Miss.Ct.App.1999); see also York v. State, 413 So.2d 1372, 1384 (Miss.1982). ¶ 14. | 1 | 1 |
Burrell v. Stategreen1 sentence2002Burrell v. State, 613 So.2d 1186, 1192 (Miss.1993). | 1 | 1 |
White v. Stategreen2 sentences2002White v. State, 507 So.2d 98, 100 (Miss.1987). 2002White v. State, 507 So.2d 98, 100 (Miss.1987). | 1 | 1 |
Cannon v. Gessnergreen2 sentences1992Wilson, 547 So. 2d at 1327. 1992Wilson, 547 So. 2d at 1327. | 1 | 1 |
Lannom v. Stategreen2 sentences1990Assuming arguendo, that the lineup was impermissibly suggestive, Manuel's identification does not have to be excluded "if upon consideration of the totality of the circumstances there was no substantial *1328 likelihood of misidentification." Lannom v. State, 464 So.2d 492, 494 (Miss. 1985). 1990Assuming arguendo, that the lineup was impermissibly suggestive, Manuel's identification does not have to be excluded "if upon consideration of the totality of the circumstances there was no substantial *1328 likelihood of misidentification." Lannom v. State, 464 So.2d 492, 494 (Miss. 1985). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Poole v. State
green
2 sentences1999The Biggers factors are only “evaluated with a view toward determining whether the testimony appears sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification.” Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992) (citing Foster v. State, 493 So.2d 1304 (Miss.1986); Poole v. State, 216 So.2d 425 (Miss.1968)). ¶ 21. 1999The Biggers factors are only “evaluated with a view toward determining whether the testimony appears sufficiently reliable to overcome the taint of the prior improperly attained identification.” Gayten v. State, 595 So.2d 409, 418 (Miss.1992) (citing Foster v. State, 493 So.2d 1304 (Miss.1986); Poole v. State, 216 So.2d 425 (Miss.1968)). ¶ 21. | 3 | 1982–1999 |
Simmons v. United States
green
2 sentences1982In any event, this Court has consistently adhered to the Biggers factors on all in-court identifications. [11] Chambers v. State, 402 So.2d 344 (Miss. 1981); Miller v. State, 399 So.2d 1338 (Miss. 1981); Bankston v. State, 391 So.2d 1005 (Miss. 1980); Kimbrough v. State, 379 So.2d 934 (Miss. 1980); Stewart v. State, 377 So.2d 1067 (Miss. 1979); Johnson v. State, 359 So.2d 1371 (Miss. 1979); Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978); Clubb v. State, 350 So.2d 693 (Miss. 1977); Wilson v. State, 344 So.2d 739 (Miss. 1977); Fells v. State, 345 So.2d 618 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1 1982In any event, this Court has consistently adhered to the Biggers factors on all in-court identifications. [11] Chambers v. State, 402 So.2d 344 (Miss. 1981); Miller v. State, 399 So.2d 1338 (Miss. 1981); Bankston v. State, 391 So.2d 1005 (Miss. 1980); Kimbrough v. State, 379 So.2d 934 (Miss. 1980); Stewart v. State, 377 So.2d 1067 (Miss. 1979); Johnson v. State, 359 So.2d 1371 (Miss. 1979); Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978); Clubb v. State, 350 So.2d 693 (Miss. 1977); Wilson v. State, 344 So.2d 739 (Miss. 1977); Fells v. State, 345 So.2d 618 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1 | 2 | 1982–2020 |
Johnson v. State
green
2 sentences2015Id. 2015Id. | 2 | 2015–2015 |
Horne v. State
green
2 sentences2006In Horne v. State, 825 So.2d 627, 637 (Miss. 2002), this Court set forth the five Biggers factors which this court must consider to determine whether the standard has been met for the identification testimony. 2005In Horne v. State, 825 So. 2d 627, 637 (Miss. 2002), this Court set forth the five Biggers factors which this court must consider to determine whether the standard has been met for the identification testimony. | 2 | 2005–2006 |
| Stewart v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Gentry v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Evans v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Dorsey v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Scott v. State
green
2 sentences1982In any event, this Court has consistently adhered to the Biggers factors on all in-court identifications. [11] Chambers v. State, 402 So.2d 344 (Miss. 1981); Miller v. State, 399 So.2d 1338 (Miss. 1981); Bankston v. State, 391 So.2d 1005 (Miss. 1980); Kimbrough v. State, 379 So.2d 934 (Miss. 1980); Stewart v. State, 377 So.2d 1067 (Miss. 1979); Johnson v. State, 359 So.2d 1371 (Miss. 1979); Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978); Clubb v. State, 350 So.2d 693 (Miss. 1977); Wilson v. State, 344 So.2d 739 (Miss. 1977); Fells v. State, 345 So.2d 618 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1 1982In any event, this Court has consistently adhered to the Biggers factors on all in-court identifications. [11] Chambers v. State, 402 So.2d 344 (Miss. 1981); Miller v. State, 399 So.2d 1338 (Miss. 1981); Bankston v. State, 391 So.2d 1005 (Miss. 1980); Kimbrough v. State, 379 So.2d 934 (Miss. 1980); Stewart v. State, 377 So.2d 1067 (Miss. 1979); Johnson v. State, 359 So.2d 1371 (Miss. 1979); Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978); Clubb v. State, 350 So.2d 693 (Miss. 1977); Wilson v. State, 344 So.2d 739 (Miss. 1977); Fells v. State, 345 So.2d 618 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Johnson v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Baylor v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Fells v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Stovall v. Denno green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Sanders v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Miller v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Oliver v. State neutral | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Bankston v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Butler v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Clubb v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Allen v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Auman v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Kimbrough v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Chambers v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Wilson v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Harmon v. State
neutral
2 sentences1982In any event, this Court has consistently adhered to the Biggers factors on all in-court identifications. [11] Chambers v. State, 402 So.2d 344 (Miss. 1981); Miller v. State, 399 So.2d 1338 (Miss. 1981); Bankston v. State, 391 So.2d 1005 (Miss. 1980); Kimbrough v. State, 379 So.2d 934 (Miss. 1980); Stewart v. State, 377 So.2d 1067 (Miss. 1979); Johnson v. State, 359 So.2d 1371 (Miss. 1979); Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978); Clubb v. State, 350 So.2d 693 (Miss. 1977); Wilson v. State, 344 So.2d 739 (Miss. 1977); Fells v. State, 345 So.2d 618 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1 1982In any event, this Court has consistently adhered to the Biggers factors on all in-court identifications. [11] Chambers v. State, 402 So.2d 344 (Miss. 1981); Miller v. State, 399 So.2d 1338 (Miss. 1981); Bankston v. State, 391 So.2d 1005 (Miss. 1980); Kimbrough v. State, 379 So.2d 934 (Miss. 1980); Stewart v. State, 377 So.2d 1067 (Miss. 1979); Johnson v. State, 359 So.2d 1371 (Miss. 1979); Scott v. State, 359 So.2d 1355 (Miss. 1978); Clubb v. State, 350 So.2d 693 (Miss. 1977); Wilson v. State, 344 So.2d 739 (Miss. 1977); Fells v. State, 345 So.2d 618 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.