Requiring defendant to don sunglasses for jury’s comparison to images of bank robber does not necessarily violate defendant’s due process rights

TRIAL United States v. Thompson, No. 07-5103, __ F.3d __ (10th Cir. May 5, 2008)(N.D. Oklahoma). Appeal of conviction for armed bank robbery, use of firearm during crime of violence, and possession of firearm after conviction of a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d), 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) , 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), (e). HELD: If there is a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification under an in-court identification procedure, district court should take eyewitness credibility issue from the jury. In this instance, however, district court’s order directing defendant to don sunglasses for jury’s comparison to bank robber shown in videotape did not violate defendant’s due process rights when considered in light of evidence of defendant’s guilt and court’s efforts to lessen suggestiveness of in-court identification procedure. Read the opinion here.