Also known as: showup · show up · show-up identification
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A one-person identification procedure in which police present a single suspect to a witness for viewing. The procedure occurs after the initiation of adversarial criminal proceedings and constitutes a critical stage at which the Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches.
After indictment, officers brought Samuel Soto in handcuffs to a hospital room where the stabbing victim lay awaiting surgery. The victim identified Soto as the attacker during the one-on-one viewing. Because the show-up occurred after formal charging, Soto's appointed counsel should have received notice and an opportunity to attend.
Following arraignment on robbery charges, detectives escorted Sophia Singh alone into a room where the store clerk viewed her through a one-way mirror. The clerk identified Singh as the robber. Counsel had not been notified of the viewing, so the identification procedure violated Singh's Sixth Amendment right.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Before any indictment or information, officers stopped Serena Soto on the street and brought her directly to the robbery victim waiting in a patrol car. The victim identified Soto as the perpetrator. Because formal adversarial proceedings had not yet begun, the absence of counsel did not violate Soto's Sixth Amendment rights.
After indictment, detectives showed Samantha Stone's photograph alone to the bank teller without notifying her lawyer. The teller identified Stone as the robber. The photographic display did not trigger the Sixth Amendment right to counsel because no corporeal confrontation occurred.
After indictment, officers placed Simone Sanders in a group of five other women on a brightly lit stage for viewing by multiple witnesses. One witness identified Sanders during the procedure. Counsel's absence required suppression of the out-of-court identification under the critical-stage doctrine.
After indictment, officers arranged for a witness to view Stephen Shaw alone in a lobby while secretly recording the exchange. The witness identified Shaw as the fraudster. The post-indictment corporeal viewing still required counsel even though the recording itself raised no separate Fourth Amendment issue.
The right attaches once formal adversarial proceedings have begun by indictment or information. At that point the show-up becomes a critical stage of the prosecution at which counsel must be present.
Supporting sources
No. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a show-up applies only after the initiation of adversarial criminal proceedings. Pre-charge show-ups fall outside the critical-stage protection.
Supporting sources
Yes. When immediate identification is necessary because the witness is dying or otherwise unavailable, a show-up may be conducted without violating due process even if it is suggestive.
Supporting sources
A show-up presents only the suspect to the witness, while a lineup places the suspect among several fillers. The single-suspect format makes a show-up inherently more suggestive.
Supporting sources
The out-of-court identification must be suppressed. In-court identifications may also be excluded unless the government proves they rest on an independent source.
Supporting sources
…pretrial confrontation for purpose of identification may take the form of a lineup, also known as an "identification parade" or "showup," as in the present case, or presentation of the suspect alone to the witness, as in Stovall v. Denno, supra . It is obvious that risks of suggestion attend either form of confrontation…