Perry v. New Hampshire
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|10-8974||N.H. S. Ct.||
Nov 2, 2011
|Jan 11, 2012||8-1||Ginsburg||OT 2011|
Holding: The Due Process Clause does not require an inquiry into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when the identification was not procured under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances by law enforcement.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on January 11, 2012. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion; Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion.
- Opinion recap: Faith in the jury's capacity (Lyle Denniston)
- Argument recap: Eyewitnesses discredited? Hardly (Lyle Denniston)
- Argument preview: Can eyewitnesses be believed? (Lyle Denniston)
- Academic round-up (Amanda Frost)
Briefs and DocumentsMerits Briefs for Petitioner
- Brief for the American Psychological Association
- Brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
- Brief for Wilton Dedge et al.
- Brief for the Innocence Network Supporting Reversal
- Brief for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
- Brief for the State of Louisiana et al. and the Territory of Guam
- Brief for the United States
- Brief for the National District Attorney's Association
- Opinion below (N.H. S. Ct.)