State v. Dickson

Summary

The concurrence would avoid deciding the difficult federal constitutional question concerning first-time in-court identifications because the court assumed the identification was improperly admitted and concluded that any due process violation was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. It joined only the harmless-error analysis and the judgment affirming the defendant’s convictions. The concurrence also cautioned that resolving the constitutional issue was especially inappropriate because the state prevailed and review by the United States Supreme Court would therefore be unlikely.