Abstract
72 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:Table Normal; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria,serif; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;} This Comment argues that rather than wait another sixteen years to implement further reforms, the Utah legislature should immediately implement legislation requiring Utah's law enforcement agencies to comply with scientifically proven best practices designed to increase eyewitness accuracy and decrease wrongful convictions. Part II of this Comment provides an overview of the leading causes of mistaken eyewitness identifications. Part III explores the past and present steps the Utah Supreme Court has taken to address the eyewitness error problem. Finally, this Comment concludes by discussing the shortcomings of Utah's current approach and offers a solution to decrease the frequency of eyewitness error and wrongful convictions in the state.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
