Explore the vast range of titles available.

False convictions have always haunted the criminal law. Although scholars have known for almost a century that mistaken identifications are the leading cause of false convictions, recent developments suggest that a reform movement may be underway. Recently, in State v. Henderson, the Supreme Court of New Jersey overhauled the test for determining admissibility of eyewitness identification evidence, substantially updating the previous approach on the basis of decades of scientific research. Although this decision should be lauded for its successful integration of empirical science into the admissibility standard, the court perpetuated an unreasonable focus on police misconduct. The court should have treated equally all factors that might undermine the reliability of an identification, rather than providing for a pretrial hearing only where something \"suggestive\" has occurred. After a grand jury indicted Henderson for first-degree murder, the trial court granted his motion for a Wade hearing to determine the admissibility of the identification.