Search results
Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977) Manson v. Brathwaite. Glover, a trained Negro undercover state police officer, purchased heroin from a seller through the open doorway of an apartment while standing for two or three minutes within two feet of the seller in a hallway illuminated by natural light.
Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1977. [1] The decision touched on the exclusionary rule in state criminal proceedings. [1] The Supreme Court held that the identification procedures used against Brathwaite did not violate the Constitution of the United States. [1]
A jury convicted Brathwaite of possession and sale of heroin. The Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed. Brathwaite then filed a petition for a writ of habeus corpus in district court.
Facts. A trooper and an informant went to the apartment of a suspected narcotics dealer to purchase heroin, which they did. The suspected dealer was charged with dealing heroin. No lineup was ever conducted, and the respondent was identified on the strength of one photograph.
Almost 30 years ago, in Manson v. Brathwaite,1 the Supreme Court set out a test for determining when due process requires suppression of an out-of-court identification produced by suggestive police procedures. The Manson Court rejected a per se exclusion rule in favor of a test focusing on whether an identification infected by suggestive ...
Manson v. Brathwaite. United States Supreme Court. 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977) Written by Sarah Venti, JD. Facts. Glover, an undercover narcotics officer, went to an apartment to buy drugs. He knocked on the door of an apartment and a man inside opened it 12 to 18 inches.
Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 97 S. Ct. 2243, 53 L. Ed. 2d 140, 1977 U.S. LEXIS 116 (U.S. June 16, 1977) Brief Fact Summary. A suggestive identification was challenged as violative of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution (“Constitution”).
