S. 377, 384 (1968). Federal courts follow a two-step analysis in ruling on the admissibility of identification evidence. Perry, 565 U.S. at 238-40; Brisco v. Ercole, 565 F.3d 80, 88 (2d Cir. 2009). First, the defendant must show that the identification was "so unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to

36:23 briefly 11:18 18:2 33:5 about 1:17 4:10 9:22 along 4:14 38:14 35:20 circumstances 15:12 20:16,22 23:13 25:1 already 28:3 31.4 34:4 B Brisco 2:21 4:8 cited 29:2 31:8,12 25:10,14 29:20 32:11 although 16:22 B 1:13 6:13 Brittany 2:7 3:19 City 48:14 36:3,4,5,9,10,11 42:3 amount 29:25 3