United States v. John Wesley Helms

963 F.2d 380 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Wesley HELMS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-50594. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 8, 1992. * Decided May 18, 1992. 1 Before JAMES R. BROWNING and FARRIS, Circuit Judges, and GEORGE, District Judge. ** 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 "To determine whether an out-of-court identification procedure is so impermissibly suggestive as to taint subsequent identification testimony in deprivation of the defendant's due process rights, we examine the totality of the surrounding circumstances." United States v. Nash, 946 F.2d 679, 681 (9th Cir.1991). If the show-up was not impermissibly suggestive, the inquiry ends. United States v. Bagley, 772 F.2d 482, 492 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 1023 (1986). Even if impermissibly suggestive, the show-up is admissible if found to be sufficiently reliable. See Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 113-14…