White

MEMORANDUM

Vernell White (“White”) appeals his conviction and sentencing, following a jury-trial, on one count of armed bank robbery and one count of brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

White raises three arguments on appeal. First, he claims that the district court committed reversible error by failing to suppress evidence of an in-field identification procedure because it was impermissibly suggestive. In deciding whether an identification procedure violated a defendant’s right to due process, the trial court must determine whether, under the totality of circumstances, the procedure was so impermissibly suggestive that it created a “very substantial likelihood” of misidentification. Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 198 , 93 S.Ct. 375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972). The in-field identification procedure was not impermissibly suggestive because the officers admonished each witness that there was no obligation to identify anyone and each witness viewed the defendants independently from the other witnesses. Even if the show-up was suggestive, there are substantial indicia that the witnesses’…