Case Number
M2010-01882-CCA-R3-CD
I concur in the results reached in the majority opinion. My concern is with the summary disposition of the Defendant’s due process claim of an impermissibly suggestive photographic lineup. The majority opinion relies on State v. Butler, 795 S.W.2d 680, 686 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990), to conclude that the analysis provided in Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972), need not be used if the identification process was not “unduly suggestive.” “Unduly suggestive” is not a term used in Biggers, which focused on suggestive and unnecessarily suggestive identification procedures. Biggers, 409 U.S. at 198-200.
Originating Judge
Judge J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Albert W. Bentley - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version
bentleyconcurring.pdf44.2 KB