State v. Doap Deng Chuol, 2014 SD 33

Doap Deng Chuol was charged with three counts of distribution and three counts of possession of crack cocaine.
L.S., a confidential informant, conducted three controlled buys from Chuol in 2011 under police supervision.
Two buys occurred at 808 West Bailey Street; a blue Lincoln Town Car connected Chuol to the drug transactions.
L.S. identified Chuol in a pretrial photo lineup deemed improper; the circuit court allowed L.S.’s in-court identification.
Chuol moved to suppress the in-court identification and sought a cross-racial identification jury instruction; the court denied both requests.
A jury convicted Chuol on all counts; Chuol appeals on suppression, jury instruction, and judgment-of-acquittal issues.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
In-court ID tainted by suggestive lineup	Chuol argues due process violation due to suggestive lineup.	Chuol contends the lineup tainted identification and requires suppression.	No due process violation; in-court ID independent of lineup.
Cross-racial identification instruction	Chuol seeks instruction on cross-racial identification.	Chuol argues instruction was necessary to avoid prejudice.	Instruction denied; existing instructions sufficient.
Sufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction	Evidence including in-court ID supports guilt.	Identification taint and lack of corroboration undermine guilt.	Sufficient evidence to sustain guilt; judgment of acquittal denied.

State v. Abdo, 518 N.W.2d 223 (S.D. 1994) (two-step test for identification; reliability over taint)
State v. Jaeb, 442 N.W.2d 463 (S.D. 1989) (indicates independent origin standard for tainted identifications)
State v. Ludemann, 2010 S.D. 9, 778 N.W.2d 618 (S.D. 2010) (identification suppression reviewed de novo)
Perry v. New Hampshire, U.S. , 132 S. Ct. 716 (U.S. 2012) (reliability-focused eyewitness identification standard)
Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (U.S. 1977) (reliability factors for identification under due process)