Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
A federally insured bank was robbed. A man with a small strip of tape on each side of his face entered the bank, pointed a pistol at the female cashier and the vice president, the only persons in the bank at the time, and forced them to fill a pillowcase with the bank's money. The man then drove away with an accomplice who had been waiting in a stolen car outside the bank. An indictment was returned against Wade (D), and two others for conspiring to rob the bank, and against D and the accomplice for the robbery itself. D was arrested on April 2, and counsel was appointed to represent him on April 26. Fifteen days later without notice to D's lawyer, the FBI had the two bank employees observe a lineup made up of D and five or six other prisoners and conducted in a courtroom of the local county courthouse. Each person in the line wore strips of tape such as allegedly worn by the robber and upon direction each said something like 'put the money in the bag,' the words allegedly uttered by the robber. Both bank employees identified D. At trial, the two employees, identified D as the robber. The prior lineup identification was then elicited from both employees on cross-examination. D's counsel moved for a judgment of acquittal or, alternatively, to strike the bank officials' courtroom identifications on the ground that conduct of the lineup, without notice to and in the absence of his appointed counsel, violated his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel. The motion was denied. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed and ordered a new trial at which the in-court identification evidence was to be excluded, holding that, though the lineup did not violate Wade's Fifth Amendment rights it was a violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co