Callaghan

People v. Callaghan

Good Law
134 Cal. Rptr. 134·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 2137·63 Cal. App. 3d 897
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 1976Crim. 15061California1,297 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elkington, J.

The Monterey County Grand Jury investigated, and took evidence on, charges that defendant Callaghan had sexually molested several young girls. Placed in evidence as Exhibit No. 1 at the hearing was a police lineup photograph depicting several male adult persons. A police officer testified that “number 3” of the photograph was a portrayal of Callaghan. Asked if her molester’s likeness appeared on Exhibit No. 1, each of his five alleged victims said he was “number 3” thereon. The grand jury thereafter returned an indictment charging Callaghan with nine separate felonious sexual offenses.

During Callaghan’s trial the court held that the “lineup identification” was constitutionally invalid according to Wade and Gilbert (United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 [ 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 ], and Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 [ 18 L.Ed.2d 1178 , 87 S.Ct. 1951 ]), because of denial to Callaghan of his right to counsel at, the time. Thereafter the court granted a motion to suppress his in-court identification by two of the alleged victims. (See United States v. Wade, supra; People v. Martin, 2 Cal.3d 822, 830-832 [ 87 Cal.Rptr. 709 , 471 P.2d 29 ].) Callaghan then moved…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.