{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "67 of 84",
    "document_number": "397",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 67 of 84 likelihood of irreparable misidentification.\" United States v. Maldonado-Rivera, 922 F.2d 934, 973 (2d Cir. 1990). If the defendant cannot make such a showing, \"the trial identification testimony is generally admissible without further inquiry into the reliability of the pretrial identification. In that circumstance, any question as to the reliability of the witness's identifications goes to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.\" Id. Second, an unduly suggestive identification procedure does not alone require suppression of the identification evidence. See Brathwaite, 432 U.S. at 110-14. Instead, the court must then determine whether the identification evidence is nevertheless \"independently reliable\" based on the totality of the circumstances. Brisco, 565 F.3d at 89; United States v. Simmons, 923 F.2d 934, 950 (2d Cir. 1991) (\"[E]ven a suggestive out-of-court identification will be admissible if, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances, it possesses sufficient indicia of reliability.\") Among the factors to be considered are: \"the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness' prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.\" Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199-200 (1972). No single factor is dispositive. See Kelly, 257 F.3d at 135. 66 DOJ-OGR-00005850",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 67 of 84",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "likelihood of irreparable misidentification.\" United States v. Maldonado-Rivera, 922 F.2d 934, 973 (2d Cir. 1990). If the defendant cannot make such a showing, \"the trial identification testimony is generally admissible without further inquiry into the reliability of the pretrial identification. In that circumstance, any question as to the reliability of the witness's identifications goes to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.\" Id. Second, an unduly suggestive identification procedure does not alone require suppression of the identification evidence. See Brathwaite, 432 U.S. at 110-14. Instead, the court must then determine whether the identification evidence is nevertheless \"independently reliable\" based on the totality of the circumstances. Brisco, 565 F.3d at 89; United States v. Simmons, 923 F.2d 934, 950 (2d Cir. 1991) (\"[E]ven a suggestive out-of-court identification will be admissible if, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances, it possesses sufficient indicia of reliability.\") Among the factors to be considered are: \"the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness' degree of attention, the accuracy of the witness' prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the confrontation, and the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.\" Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199-200 (1972). No single factor is dispositive. See Kelly, 257 F.3d at 135.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "66",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005850",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21",
      "1990",
      "1991",
      "1972"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 397",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005850"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing the admissibility of identification evidence. The text is printed and clear, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document is likely a page from a larger filing, as indicated by the page number '67 of 84'."
}