State v. Gore

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, holding that lay identification testimony concerning a person depicted in surveillance video or photographs is admissible when it satisfies the ordinary requirements that it be rationally based on the witness’s perception and helpful to the fact finder. The court adopted a totality-of-the-circumstances test and concluded that the witness’s long-standing relationship with the defendant and familiarity with his appearance supported admission of the identification. The court also upheld the denial of a mistrial and new trial because the defendant failed to show prejudice from jurors’ use of unauthorized magnifying glasses.