Brown v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Brown’s motion in limine seeking to exclude two witnesses’ in-court identifications at his retrial. It held that the witnesses’ observation of Brown during the first trial was not an impermissibly suggestive identification procedure because the police did not intentionally orchestrate the observation to procure an identification, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the testimony after balancing its probative value against unfair prejudice. No separate opinions were filed.