U.S. v. Johnson

In prosecution on bank robbery charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in admitting testimony from witness to one bank robbery that she had identified defendant as culprit by selecting his photograph from photo array containing six photographs given to her by police. While defendant argued that photo array procedure is improperly suggestive, and that police should have used procedure calling for police to give witness photographs sequentially until she identified culprit, instant photo array was not suggestive where nothing in array made defendant’s photograph stand out from others. Ct. also fined plaintiff’s $2,000 for failing to include in brief’s appendix transcript of hearing that produced ruling at issue on appeal and by falsely representing that appendix had contained all materials required under Circuit Rule 30(a) and (b).