Ifill v. Lamanna

Background

Richard Ifill filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a police lineup in which a robbery and kidnapping victim identified him. He alleged that the lineup was unduly suggestive and violated his federal constitutional right to due process.

The district court referred the petition to Magistrate Judge Parker for a report and recommendation, which is a magistrate judge’s proposed ruling for the district judge to review. After the petition was fully briefed, Judge Parker recommended that the petition be denied.

Objections and Review

Ifill objected after receiving an extension of time. He argued that the lineup was unduly suggestive because he was the only bald man in it, that the identification was not independently reliable under the five-factor analysis from Neil v. Biggers, and that Judge Parker should have considered whether any error was harmless.

The district court found that the objections were conclusory and repeated arguments made earlier. Because the objections were not substantive, the court stated that it could accept the report and recommendation if the record showed no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the report and recommendation in full and denied Ifill’s petition. The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Ifill had not made a substantial showing that a federal right was denied. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the open motion at docket entry 1.