Policy Text
University of California, San Francisco
Police Department General Orders
1
4.6 Patrol Operations
4.6.19 Photographic and Physical Line -Ups (Revised: 9/1/20 )
It shall be the policy of this Department to conduct photographic line-ups in a manner that
reduces the risk of wrongful conviction and aids in the detection and apprehension of offenders.
Officers will adhere to the established procedures in order to maximize the reliability of witness
identifications, minimize unjust accusations of innocent persons and establish reliable evidence
that conforms to es tablished legal procedure.
A. Definitions
1. Photographic Line -Up: An identification procedure in which an array of
photographs, including a photograph of the person suspect ed as the perpetrator of
an offense and additional photographs of other persons not suspected of the
offense, is displayed to an eyewitness in hard copy form for the purpose of
determining whether the eyewitness is able to identif y the suspect as the
perpetrator.
a. Simultane ous Line -Up: Showing a group of similar photos to a witness all
at the same time.
b. Sequential Line-Up: Showing a group of similar photographs to a witness
one at a time.
2. Filler : A person or a photograph of a person who is not suspected of an offense
and is included in an identification procedure.
3. Blind Administration : The administrator of an eyewitness identification procedure
does not know the identity of the suspect.
4. Blinded Admin istration : The administrator of an eyewitness identificatio n
procedure may know the identity of the suspect but does not know where the
suspect’s photo has been placed or positioned in the photographic line -up.
5. Physical Line-Up: A physical line -up is placing a suspect among people un -
suspected of committing the crime (fillers) and asking the eyewitness if he/she
can identify the perpetrator.
B. Photographic Line-Ups
1. Composing Photographic Line-Ups
a. Include only one suspect in each identification procedure.
b. Select a photo of the suspect that resembles the suspect's appearance at the
time of the incident.
c. Select filler photographs of the other persons that resemble the suspect in
significant fe atures.
d. Include a minimum of five filler photographs (non -suspects) per
identification procedure.
e. Complete uniformity of features is not required. Avoid using fillers that
too closely resemble the suspect.
University of California, San Francisco
Police Department General Orders
2
f. If there is more than one witness, eac h witness will be shown the line -up
separately.
g. The suspect photo shall be placed in a different position in the grouping
for each witness, and witnesses will not be permitted to communicate with
each other until after the line -up procedure has been com pleted.
h. If the witness has previously viewed a photo line -up in connection with
the identification of another person suspected of involvement in the
offense, the filler photographs in the line -up shall be different from t hose
used in any prior line-up.
2. Instructing the Witnesses Prior to Procedure
a. Prior to conducting the identification procedure, and as close in time to the
incident as possible, the eyewitness shall provide the description of the
perpetrator of the offense.
b. Each witness is to view any identification procedure separately. Witnesses
shall not be permitted to communicate with each other until all
identification procedures are completed and should be instructed not to
discuss their identifications with anyone else.
c. Advise the witness that he/she will be asked to view a set of photographs
that may or may not contain a picture of the person who committed the
crime.
d. Advise the witness that:
1. It is just as important to clear innocent persons from suspicion as to
identify guilty parties.
2. Individuals depicted in line -up photos may not appear exactly as
they did on the date of the incident because features such as head
and facial hair are subject to change.
3. Procedures require the officer to ask the witness to state i n their
own words if they can identify the person involved in the crime
being investigated.
4. An indentifications or failure to make an identification will not end
the investigation.
5. He/she should not feel compelled to make an identificaition.
3. Avoi ding Officer and Witness "Suggestion"
a. Nothing shall be said to the eyewitness that might influence his/her
identification of the person suspected as the perpetrator. Officers must not,
by word or gesture, suggest opinions to any witness concerning the guilt
or innocence of a suspect in any identification procedure. Witnesses
making inquiries about an officer's opinion shall be informed of this
restriction.
b. A witness who has taken part in an identification procedure must not be
permitted to state con clusions within earshot of another person who is
about to be or has been a viewer of the identification procedure.
University of California, San Francisco
Police Department General Orders
3
4. Blind/ Blind ed Procedure
The investigator conducting the identification procedure shall use blind or blinded
administration to ensure reliable and accurate identification of suspects .
a. Blind Administration
(1) The administrator of the eye -witness identification procedure does
not know the identity of the suspect.
b. Blinded Administration
(1) Automated Computer Program: An automated computer program
is used that preventss the administrator from seeing which photo
the eyewitness is viewing until after the identification procedure
has been completed.
(2) Folder Shuffle : Individual p hotographs are placed in folders , and
the fo l