This article explains how, in State v. Lawson, 291 P.3d 673 (Or. 2012), the Oregon Supreme Court reconsidered the role trial judges must play in screening eyewitness identification. The court recognized the shortcomings of eyewitness evidence, including a high number of wrongful convictions stemming from misidentification, but also recognized that eyewitness identification may be the only evidence connecting a guilty defendant to a crime. In weighing eyewitness identification admissibility questions, Oregon Evidence Code rules (similar to their Federal Rule of Evidence counterparts) 401, 602 and 701 all must be considered by the trial judge.
GW Paper Series
GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2015-31; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015-31
Saltzburg, Stephen A., Judicial Innovations to Screen Eyewitness Identifications (2013). 28 Crim. Just. (2013).; GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2015-31; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015-31. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2642267