In People v. Gray, 457 Mich 107, 111; 577 NW2d 92 (1998), a criminal sexual conduct case, after making a tentative identification of the defendant at the lineup, the victim was informed that the police had arrested a suspect, and was shown a photograph of the defendant. After seeing the photograph, the victim stated that she was sure that the defendant was the person that attacked her. Gray, supra at 109-110. The trial court denied a motion by the defendant to prohibit an in-court identification of the defendant by the victim, holding that although the use of the photograph by the deputy was improper, there was a sufficiently independent basis for the victim to identify the defendant at trial. The Court affirmed the decision of the trial court and the Michigan Supreme Court granted leave to appeal. Gray, supra at 110. In holding that the identification procedure was highly suggestive, the Supreme Court stated: Although the suggestive photographic identification procedure in this case occurred after a legitimate corporal lineup, this case still presents the danger that once the identify of the victim's assailant was suggested to her through the photographic identification procedure, she "may be likely to base later identifications of the suspect upon that photograph, rather than on her recollection of the crime." Gray, supra at 112.