Perry v. New Hampshire

Summary

The Court held that the Due Process Clause does not require a trial court to conduct a preliminary reliability assessment of an eyewitness identification unless suggestive circumstances were arranged by law enforcement. Because the identification here resulted from circumstances the police did not improperly arrange, the jury could assess its reliability using ordinary adversarial safeguards, including cross-examination and jury instructions. Justice Thomas, concurring, would have confined the relevant precedent to its precise circumstances, while Justice Sotomayor, dissenting, would have required the ordinary reliability inquiry for intentional or inadvertent police suggestion.