With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (Report at 3-5); they described the gunman as a 5'10 Hispanic man, twenty-five years old, weighing approximately 185 pounds, (Tr. II at 180:15-23), and petitioner describes himself as being of Irish and Puerto Rican descent, thirty-one years old, 6'1, and weighing 185 pounds (Pet.6G); and both Mr. and Mrs. Trinh identified Petitioner at the line-up without hesitation less than twenty days after the robbery. (Tr. II at 232-33.) The evidence reflects that Mrs. Trinh's identification stemmed from a independent source and not from the allegedly unlawful arrest. 7 . The Court does not understand there to be a due process claim arising from Petitioner's arrest and subsequent identification by Mrs. Trinh. See, e.g., Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977) (<HOLDING>) (citing Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S.

A: holding that to protect defendants sixth amendment rights a court must determine whether witness identification testimony was tainted by impermissibly suggestive procedures
B: recognizing  1983 substantive due process claim
C: recognizing due process violation when suggestive identification procedures create a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification
D: holding california postdeprivation recovery procedures satisfy due process despite lack of notice to claimant of recovery procedures
C.