The Single Witness and the Single Eyewitness
The Court has decided two cases involving eyewitness evidence in two days, both 8-1 rulings, but with seemingly inconsistent attitudes towards eyewitness identification procedures. The dueling cases touch more on general conduct of police and prosecutors than on core issues regarding reliability of eyewitness memory. But they provide a fascinating look at how the Justices may evaluate trial evidence in criminal cases.
In the first case, Smith v. Cain, a "single witness" linked Juan Smith to five murders he was convicted of in New Orleans. It was an easy case, with seven Justices joining Chief Justice Roberts' short, clear opinion. At trial, the lone witness said he saw the attacker face to face and was sure Smith was the one. However, it emerged in habeas proceedings that the prosecutor never told the defense that the single witness told police early on that he did not think he could even make an identification of the killer. Maybe he was not an eyewitness at all – just a witness. Police notes documented how in the days right after the crime, he said he “could not ID anyone because [he] couldn’t see faces” and “would not know them if [he] saw them.” Everything hinged on this one witness; there was no other evidence.