Simultaneous Review of Photos of Suspect not Suggestive

Viewing suspect photos simultaneously, rather than in succession, is not unduly suggestive and does not violate the due process rights of the defendant

Commonwealth v. Thomas, 2017 BL 42301, Mass., No. SJC-12055, 2/13/17.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has backed away from an earlier ruling that suggested that photo line-ups for suspect identification should be shown in succession, rather finding that simultaneously showing a collection of photos is not unduly suggestive. In the recent decision, the court pointed towards new studies that indicate that sequentially showing photographs to witnesses for suspect identification were not only more likely to incorrectly choose the suspect, but that they were more likely to choose a completely innocent person. The court affirmed the trial court’s decision to deny the defendant’s motion to suppress the photo identification evidence.

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/Commonwealth_v_Thomas_No_SJC12055_2017_BL_42301_Mass_Feb_13_2017_?1487267028

Michigan v. Mitchell Jordan Young - Captions with Photographic Evidence

Photographic evidence with captions that accurately relay the evidence are proper.

Michigan v. Mitchell Jordan Young

This case arises from the brutal murder of a man, and the attacks on his wife and son in Farmington Hills, MI. The defendant argues that the prosecutor was relaying their personal opinion of the defendant’s guilt through the use of photographs with accompanying text. The court determined that as long as an image and caption “accurately relays the evidence presented through the use of photographs with accompanying text. The court determined at trial,” will not be deemed improper.

Even when photographs of a victim are graphic they will be accepted in court when they “mirror[] the photographs already admitted into evidence.” According to People v. Howard, 226 Mich App 528, 550; 575 NWnd 16 (1997) autopsy photographs that depict injury and are probative to intent can be admitted. As long as the photographs are properly admitted in the first place, they may be used in court even if they arouse the emotions of the jury, so long as it is not because of the use of text to “modify” the photograph.

The defendant relies on In re Glasman, 175 Wash.2d 696, 706; 286 P.3d 673 (2012) (en banc), to argue that the prosecutor’s photograph captions are “the equivalent of unadmitted evidence” that indicate the prosecution’s personal opinion of the defendant’s guilt. The court in this case, however, ruled that since the text in the photographs only “recited admitted evidence and reasonable inferences from that evidence” there is no issue.

http://www.michbar.org/opinions/appeals/2014/122314/58991.pdf