How have courts interpreted identification procedures in the context of a charge under section 186.22 of the Criminal Code?

^12. Because appellant has failed to meet his burden of establishing that the identification procedures used here were unduly suggestive, we need not reach the question "'whether the identification was nevertheless reliable under the totality of the circumstances.' [Citations.]" (People v. Carter, supra, 36 Cal.4th at p. 1164.) We will, however, discuss the significance of appellant's booking photograph in conjunction with his claim of insufficiency of the evidence, post.

^13. The elements of the substantive offense defined in section 186.22, subdivision (a), with which appellant was charged in count 2, are actively participating in a criminal street gang with knowledge that the gang's members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and willfully promoting, furthering, or assisting in any felonious criminal conduct by members of the gang. (People v. Lamas (2007) 42 Cal.4th 516, 523; People v. Robles (2000) 23 Cal.4th 1106, 1115.)