Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293 (1967), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that a pretrial identification not covered by the Sixth Amendment right to counsel should be excluded if it was so unnecessarily suggestive as to violate due process.

[5] Stovall was decided on the same day as United States v. Wade and Gilbert v. California, two cases dealing with the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in pretrial stages.

The Court noted that police departments had relied on Sixth Amendment jurisprudence as it was before Wade, and that the absence of counsel at the identification did not jeopardize Stovall's right to a fair trial seriously enough to justify retroactive application.

[7] Justice Douglas dissented from the Court's refusal to retroactively apply the rule of Wade to find a Sixth Amendment violation.

Black also dissented from the Court's holding that a defendant can mount a due process challenge to their conviction in the absence of a violation of a specific Amendment.

[12] Until its overruling in Griffith, Stovall, along with the case Linkletter v. Walker, established a three factor test for determining if a law should be applied retroactively that examined purpose, reliance, and effect.