Mug shots of a criminal defendant ordinarily should not be introduced into evidence, even where a witness’ pretrial identification of the defendant used mug shots.{footnote}United States v. Hines, 470 F.2d 225 (3d Cir. 1972).
State v. Kelly, 526 P.2d 720 (Ariz. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 935 (1975); State v. Cross, 600 P.2d 1126 (Ariz. Ct. App.1979).{/footnote}  The prosecution is not allowed to refer to the photographs used in a pretrial identification as "mug shots" before the jury.{footnote}United States v. Hines, 470 F.2d 225 (3d Cir. 1972).{/footnote}

Where a criminal defendant claims that he was physically abused by the ploice, it is proper for the prosecution to introduce in rebuttal the defendant’s mug shot.  Identifting numbers on the photograph should be removed, but this is not absolutely required.{footnote}Reyes v. State, 579 S.W.2d 927 (Tex. Crim. 1979).{/footnote}

Related Articles

PHOTOGRAPHS–Identification of Persons.