People v. Clifton

Prior to trial, Defendant moved to suppress 3 pretrial identifications on the ground that police used unduly suggestive lineup procedures. Court denied motion and, after bench trial, convicted him of armed robbery with a firearm. Although Defendant complained about his counsel's performance, court proceeded without preliminary inquiry into those concerns. The multiple similarities between his prior description (dreadlocks, a dark hoodie, and white gym shoes) and his appearance in the lineup made the lineup strongly suggestive.  Defendant was the only one in the lineup that appeared consistent with every feature that the witnesses had provided in their descriptions of the suspect. Remand is appropriate to allow court to evaluate the independence of the witnesses' identifications.Defendant's dialogue with the court was sufficient to trigger a preliminary Krankel inquiry as to ineffective assistance of counsel. (PUCINSKI, concurring; LAVIN, concurring in part and dissenting in part.)