State v. Clopten
SimpleOriginal

Summary

Held that expert testimony on eyewitness identification should be admitted when a witness identifies a stranger and reliability factors are present, because experts educate juries more than cross-examination or instructions alone.

2009 | State Juristiction

State v. Clopten

Keywords Eyewitness identification; expert testimony; jury education; stranger identification; reliability factors; cross-examination; expert witness
Open Case as PDF

Summary

Expert testimony regarding eyewitness identification is admissible when a witness identifies an unfamiliar individual and factors indicating reliability are present. This approach is taken because expert testimony provides juries with more comprehensive information than what can be conveyed through cross-examination or judicial instructions alone.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

Expert testimony on eyewitness identification should be allowed in cases where a witness identifies an unfamiliar person and specific reliability factors are evident. This is because experts provide juries with a greater understanding of the complexities of eyewitness accounts than what can be achieved through cross-examination or judicial instructions alone.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

Expert information about eyewitness identification can be used in court. This happens when a witness identifies someone they do not know, and there are other factors that show the identification is dependable. Expert testimony helps juries understand more than just questioning or instructions can on their own.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

A court decided that experts should be allowed to talk about how people identify others they have never met before. This is important when someone picks out a stranger in a lineup or photo. Experts can help juries understand more about these situations than just asking questions or giving directions.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

State v. Clopten, 2009 UT 84, 223 P.3d 1103 (Utah 2009)

Highlights