Raising the Standard of Evidence for Initiating an Identification Procedure

C. McCoy, Jacqueline Katzman
{"title":"Raising the Standard of Evidence for Initiating an Identification Procedure","authors":"C. McCoy, Jacqueline Katzman","doi":"10.5070/cj85154810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do police select suspects for witnesses to identify? There is currently no standard for the quantity of evidence required before investigators can order an identification procedure. Because eyewitness misidentification continues to be the leading cause of wrongful convictions, law and policy should guide police discretion at this investigatory stage by requiring detectives to show an evidentiary basis for placing suspects in lineups, showups, or photo arrays. The American Law Institute has proposed an addition to the Model Penal Code requiring Graduate where she teaches doctoral sem-inars on criminal justice policy, criminology and the law, police, and sentenc- ing. She publishes widely in law and criminal justice journals, most recently on reforming sentencing laws for burglary (in Journal of Legislation, with Phil- ip Kopp, 2020). From 2016–2018, McCoy served as Director of Policy Analysis for the Inspector General for the New York City Police Department. She has served on several policy advisory boards, most recently on the Plea Bargaining Review Task Force of the New York City Bar Association. McCoy holds a B.A. from Hiram College (Political Science and Spanish), a J.D. from the University of Cincinnati, and a Ph.D. in Jurisprudence and Social Policy from the University of California, Berkeley. She is a member of the Ohio bar. † Jacqueline Katzman is a doctoral student at the City University of New York, Graduate Center and John Jay College, where she is dual specializing in the Psy- chology and Law and Basic and Applied Social Psychology Programs. She re-searches the way in which social psychological principles—such as attributions, impression formation, attitudes, and heuristics—affect eyewitness identification and juror decisionmaking. She has presented at conferences nationwide and received the American Psychology-Law Society’s Outstanding Student Presenta- tion Award in Spring 2020. Katzman’s work has been published by traditional outlets such as Oxford University Press as well as digital media outlets","PeriodicalId":91042,"journal":{"name":"UCLA criminal justice law review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UCLA criminal justice law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/cj85154810","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

How do police select suspects for witnesses to identify? There is currently no standard for the quantity of evidence required before investigators can order an identification procedure. Because eyewitness misidentification continues to be the leading cause of wrongful convictions, law and policy should guide police discretion at this investigatory stage by requiring detectives to show an evidentiary basis for placing suspects in lineups, showups, or photo arrays. The American Law Institute has proposed an addition to the Model Penal Code requiring Graduate where she teaches doctoral sem-inars on criminal justice policy, criminology and the law, police, and sentenc- ing. She publishes widely in law and criminal justice journals, most recently on reforming sentencing laws for burglary (in Journal of Legislation, with Phil- ip Kopp, 2020). From 2016–2018, McCoy served as Director of Policy Analysis for the Inspector General for the New York City Police Department. She has served on several policy advisory boards, most recently on the Plea Bargaining Review Task Force of the New York City Bar Association. McCoy holds a B.A. from Hiram College (Political Science and Spanish), a J.D. from the University of Cincinnati, and a Ph.D. in Jurisprudence and Social Policy from the University of California, Berkeley. She is a member of the Ohio bar. † Jacqueline Katzman is a doctoral student at the City University of New York, Graduate Center and John Jay College, where she is dual specializing in the Psy- chology and Law and Basic and Applied Social Psychology Programs. She re-searches the way in which social psychological principles—such as attributions, impression formation, attitudes, and heuristics—affect eyewitness identification and juror decisionmaking. She has presented at conferences nationwide and received the American Psychology-Law Society’s Outstanding Student Presenta- tion Award in Spring 2020. Katzman’s work has been published by traditional outlets such as Oxford University Press as well as digital media outlets
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
提高启动认定程序的证据标准
警方如何挑选嫌疑人供证人指认?在调查人员可以下令进行鉴定程序之前,目前没有关于所需证据数量的标准。由于目击证人的错误辨认仍然是错误定罪的主要原因,法律和政策应该指导警察在这个调查阶段的自由裁量权,要求侦探出示证据基础,将嫌疑人排成一排,展示,或照片阵列。美国法律协会提议在《模范刑法典》中增加一项要求研究生的内容,在那里她教授关于刑事司法政策、犯罪学和法律、警察和量刑的博士研讨班。她在法律和刑事司法期刊上发表了大量文章,最近发表了关于改革入室盗窃量刑法的文章(在《立法杂志》上,与Phil- ip Kopp合作,2020年)。2016年至2018年,McCoy担任纽约市警察局监察长政策分析主任。她曾在多个政策咨询委员会任职,最近在纽约市律师协会的辩诉交易审查工作组任职。McCoy持有Hiram College(政治学和西班牙语)的学士学位,辛辛那提大学的法学博士学位,以及加州大学伯克利分校的法学和社会政策博士学位。她是俄亥俄州律师协会的会员。†杰奎琳·卡兹曼是纽约城市大学研究生中心和约翰·杰伊学院的博士生,她在那里主修心理学和法学以及基础和应用社会心理学课程。她研究了社会心理学原理——如归因、印象形成、态度和启发式——如何影响目击者的识别和陪审员的决策。她曾在全国会议上发表演讲,并在2020年春季获得了美国心理法律协会的优秀学生演讲奖。卡兹曼的作品已在牛津大学出版社等传统媒体和数字媒体上出版
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
I get Worried with This...Constitutionality by Statistics: A Critical Analysis of Discourse, Framing, and Discursive Strategies to Navigate Uncertainties in the Argersinger Oral Arguments The UCLA Law COVID Behind Bars Data Project: Doing Social Justice Work from Inside a Law School So Far, So Good: Enforcing California's Gun Violence Restraining Orders Before and After Bruen The Supreme Court's Second and Fifteenth Amendment Hypocrisy Could Shoot Down Voting Rights...and People "What Will Become of the Innocent?": Pretrial Detention, the Presumption of Innocence, and Punishment Before Trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1