United States v. Anthony Lapierre

Good Law
998 F.2d 1460·1993 WL 248739
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 19, 199392-10321California4,036 words

Opinion

Opinion

Norris, J.

Appellant Anthony LaPierre challenges his bank robbery and firearm convictions and contends that the district court erred in 1) failing to suppress his lineup identification, 2) allowing a police officer to testify that he was the individual pictured in the bank surveillance photos, 3) failing to sever counts, 4) failing to suppress his post-arrest state ments, and 5) failing to grant him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility because he planned to appeal his conviction. We vacate and remand.

I

LaPierre claims that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel because his counsel was not present for the entire post-charge lineup, at which three witnesses identified him. The district court denied La-Pierre’s motion to suppress the lineup identification. We hold that the lineup procedure in this case proceeded in violation of United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967).

A

LaPierre’s lineup was scheduled for 1:00 p.m. on August 2,1991. His attorney, Assistant Federal Public Defender Bernie Bervar, arrived at the Honolulu Police Department at approximately 12:45 p.m., and was accompanied by Charles Rose, an investigator with the Public…

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.