Patterson v. United States
56 A.3d 1152
D.C.2012Background
- Appellant Patterson sought to admit Dr. Henry Shulman’s expert testimony on memory and perception affecting eyewitness identifications before his three trials.
- The government opposed, arguing the victim’s identification was corroborated by arrest in a car with stolen property, pass-through checks, and location of stolen items.
- The trial court denied the motion, distinguishing this case from prior cases where expert identification testimony aided unreliable cross-racial identifications.
- The court found substantial corroboration existed, declining to admit expert testimony and concluding the standard jury instruction sufficed to assess reliability.
- Patterson renewed the request at a second trial; the second judge likewise denied, deeming no reason to revisit the prior discretionary decision.
- On appeal, the court considers whether to review the Dyas test and whether any error was harmless under Kotteakos in light of corroborative evidence, ultimately granting rehearing and amending the opinion to affirm Patterson’s convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion on expert identification testimony | Patterson contends Dyas test not satisfied by reliance on corroboration alone | United States argues corroboration and cross-racial context allowed denial without Dyas review | Harmless error under Kotteakos; no reversal |
| Whether the error, if any, was harmless given corroborative evidence | Expert testimony could aid reliability of identification notwithstanding corroboration | Corroborative evidence suffices; expert testimony unnecessary | Harmless under Kotteakos |
| Whether the Dyas framework needed to be applied on appeal | First trial’s reliance on corroboration should trigger Dyas inquiry | Dyas inquiry not required given corroboration and harmlessness | Dyas inquiry not required; harmless under record |
Key Cases Cited
- Dyas v. United States, 376 A.2d 827 (D.C. 1977) (three-part test for admitting expert identification testimony)
- Benn v. United States (Benn II), 978 A.2d 1257 (D.C. 2009) (harmlessness depends on corroboration in eyewitness cases)
- Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (Supreme Court 1946) (harmless error review in multi-defendant/complex cases)
- West v. United States, 866 A.2d 74 (D.C. 2005) (reliability and misidentification considerations in eyewitness identifications)