Brown v. State

Decision Date05 December 1975
Docket NumberNo. 8076,8076
Citation542 P.2d 1068,91 Nev. 777
PartiesJeptha Marvin BROWN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
CourtNevada Supreme Court
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Convicted of robbery, appellant filed this appeal wherein he contends: (1) he was entitled to counsel at the crime scene identification; and (2) the identification violated due process standards. We reject both contentions.

On April 19, 1974, a robbery occurred at Sammy's News Stand in Las Vegas. The store clerk immediately contacted the police and provided a detailed description of the suspect. A patrolman spotted a man matching the description running into the Golden Hotel near the newsstand. When the officers knocked, appellant answered his hotel room door and was immediately arrested. Shortly thereafter, the store clerk identified appellant at the crime scene.

1. We reject appellant's contention that he was denied his sixth amendment right to counsel at the crime scene identification. The right does not exist where the accused has been arrested on probable cause and prior to the commencement of any prosecution. Reed v. Warden, 89 Nev. 141, 508 P.2d 2 (1973); Spencer v. State, 88 Nev. 392, 498 P.2d 1335 (1972). Cf. Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L.Ed.2d 411 (1972).

2. We also reject his contention that the crime scene identification was so suggestive as to violate due process. Cf. Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 (1967). We doubt the identification violates due process, but it is unnecessary to decide the issue. After a full evidentiary hearing, the district judge found the in-court identification was based on observations independent of the crime scene lineup. For example, the store clerk observed the robber for approximately 25 minutes during two separate times he was seen in the store. She provided a detailed description of his features and clothing. This evidence amply supports the district court's determination that the in-court identification had independent origin. Riley v. State, 86 Nev. 244, 468 P.2d 11 (1970); McCray v. State, 85 Nev. 597, 460 P.2d 160 (1969).

Affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Doggett v. Warden, Nevada State Prison, 9305
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • 1 d4 Dezembro d4 1977
  • Anderson v. State
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • 23 d5 Janeiro d5 1976
    ...crime scene identification was prior to any prosecution whatever. Thus, the claimed right to counsel does not exist. Brown v. State, 91 Nev. 777, 542 P.2d 1068 (1975). Cf. Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L.Ed.2d 411 We also reject the contention that the identfification v......
  • Lambert v. State, 9949
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • 7 d2 Fevereiro d2 1978
    ...might support Lambert's subjective claim. Cf. Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 (1967); Brown v. State, 91 Nev. 777, 542 P.2d 1068 (1975). Furthermore, we find nothing in the record to suggest impropriety. See Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT