U.S. v. Miller

In prosecution on bank robbery charge, defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to seek suppression of in-court identification of defendant as culprit or for failing to challenge credibility of FBI agent’s testimony concerning license plate identification process used by police to link defendant’s vehicle to getaway car at scene of crime and agent’s misstatement as to amount that defendant’s bank account was overdrawn on day of crime. Any misstatement regarding process used to identify defendant’s car as getaway vehicle was immaterial since defendant and his girlfriend admitted that his car was at scene of crime. Moreover, $600 difference in amount that defendant’s bank account was overdrawn would not have effected outcome of trial given strength of evidence against defendant. Also failure to contest in-court identification of defendant as culprit was not unreasonable where: (1) standard for striking in-court identification is high; and (2) defense counsel was able to point out weaknesses of said identification during cross-examination.