Spriggs v. Wilson, 23548
Decision Date | 16 October 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 23548,23548 |
Citation | 136 US App. DC 177,419 F.2d 759 |
Parties | Harold A. SPRIGGS, Appellant, v. Jerry V. WILSON et al., Appellees. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Mr. Norman Lefstein, with whom Mr. Joseph Paull, Washington, D. C., was on the motion, for appellant.
Mr. Donald S. Smith, Asst. U. S. Atty. for appellees. Messrs. Thomas A Flannery, U. S. Atty., and John A. Terry and Mrs. Ellen Lee Park, Asst. U. S. Attys., also entered appearances for appellees.
Before BAZELON, Chief Judge, and WRIGHT and McGOWAN, Circuit Judges.
The motion for stay is denied. In so doing, we deem it appropriate to state, as we suggested in United States v. Allen, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 84, 408 F.2d 1287 (1969), that on this record we see no reason, and the Government at oral argument has offered none beyond an unsubstantiated reference to convenience, why the right to effective assistance of counsel does not require that the description of the suspect as given to the police be made available to counsel for the appellant at the lineup. See United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967); Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178 (1967). See also A.L.I. Model Code of Pre-Arraignment Procedure, Study Draft No. 1, page 32 (April 1968). We, of course, do not intend to indicate any opinion on the merits of the other issues raised on this appeal.
Motion denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Spriggs v. Wilson
...make a determination concerning the stay. Oral argument was held and we denied appellant's request for a stay. See Spriggs v. Wilson, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 177, 419 F.2d 759 (1969). Despite our order appellant was never required to appear in a lineup since the complaining witness was not present......
-
United States v. Ash, 22340.
...puts forward the concept that the description of the suspect given by the witness to the police be available, see Spriggs v. Wilson, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 177, 419 F.2d 759 (1969). The law enforcement authorities also have an interest in avoiding detention or protracted detention of the innocent......
-
United States v. Greene
...D.C. 203, 399 F.2d 574, 578-579 (1968); United States v. Allen, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 84, 408 F.2d 1287 (1969); Spriggs v. Wilson, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 177, 419 F.2d 759 (1969). As we stated in Allen, the Adams order assumes the availability to its addressee of the rights contemplated by Wade-Gilber......
-
United States v. Neverson
...be given prior to the lineup any description of the suspect given to the police by the lineup witness. See also Spriggs v. Wilson, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 177, 419 F.2d 759 (1969). Allen also sets out other steps which, if taken, would contribute to the trustworthiness of a First, we note that the......