Superior Court: The Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 52063, Thomas A. Swayze, Jr., J., on February 2, 1978, entered a judgment on a verdict of guilty. Court of Appeals: Holding that the identification of the defendant from the photographs was proper and holding against the defendant on several other issues, the court affirmed the judgment at 23 Wn. App. 454. Supreme Court: Holding that testimony regarding clothing possessed by the defendant was properly admitted and that the defendant was not prejudiced by other identification testimony or by reference to his prior criminal activity, the court affirms the decision of the Court of Appeals.
Although the propriety of the court's ruling is not directly in issue on this appeal, and is not ruled, the following cases deal with surveillance photographs taken during the course of bank holdups and with the admissibility of testimony of a lay witness to the effect that the person shown in the photograph is the defendant. In United States v. Murray, 523 F.2d 489 (8th Cir. 1975); People v. van Perry, 60 Cal. App.3d 608, 131 Cal.Rptr. 629 (1976); State v. Demouchet, 353 So.2d 1025 (La. 1977); and State v. Jamison, 23 Wash.App. 454, 597 P.2d 424 (1979), the testimony was held admissible. In United States v. Robinson, 544 F.2d 110 (2d Cir. 1976), there is dictum to the effect that the testimony is inadmissible.
Defendant appealed to this court. In State v. Jamison, 23 Wn. App. 454, 597 P.2d 424 (1979), we affirmed the declination for reasons equally applicable here. Jamison was again transferred from juvenile court to superior court on October 7, 1977, pursuant to the charges brought against him in the present case.