[Download] "State v. Jones" by Supreme Court of Montana ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: State v. Jones
• Author : Supreme Court of Montana
• Release Date : January 03, 1933
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 60 KB

Description

Criminal Law ? Robbery ? Accomplices ? Insufficiency of Corroborating Evidence ? Rules as to Nature of Corroborating Evidence Required ? Conspiracy. Criminal Law ? Accomplices ? Sufficiency of Corroborating Evidence Question of Law for Court. 1. Where the state relies on the testimony of an accomplice to convict one of crime, the question whether the evidence in corroboration of that given by the accomplice meets the requirement of section 11988, Revised Codes 1921, that it must in itself, without the aid of the testimony of the accomplice, tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged, is one of law for the court. Same ? Accomplices ? Corroboration ? What to be Considered in Determining Sufficiency of Corroborating Testimony. 2. All the testimony adduced at a criminal trial, excluding that of the accomplice but including that of defendant, must be considered in determining the sufficiency of testimony said to corroborate that of the accomplice, except where there are two or more accomplices no statement of one can supply corroboration for another. - Page 318 Same ? Accomplices ? Nature of Corroborating Testimony. 3. The independent evidence required by section 11988, above, for corroboration of that given by an accomplice need not be direct; it may be in whole or in part circumstantial. Same ? Accomplices ? When Corroborating Evidence Sufficient. 4. The law does not require that an accomplice be corroborated upon every fact testified to by him, or that the independent evidence mentioned in section 11988 be sufficient to justify a conviction or connect defendant with the commission of the offense for which he is on trial; if it tends to connect him therewith or is such that culpability on defendants part may be deduced therefrom, it is sufficient. Same ? Accomplices ? Corroborating Evidence Need not be Strong ? Province of Jury. 5. Evidence corroborating an accomplice need not be strong, and in passing upon its weight the jury is at liberty to disbelieve explanations of facts and circumstances given by the defendant and his witnesses. Same ? Formation of Conspiracy ? Presence of Defendant at Place Where Formed may be Considered by Jury in Weighing Evidence Corroborating Accomplice. 6. The presence of defendant at or near the place where a conspiracy was testified to by an accomplice as having been formed, with any motive defendant may have had for the commission of the offense charged against him, may be considered by the jury. Same ? Accomplices ? Suspicion That Defendant was Implicated in Crime Insufficient in Corroboration of Accomplice ? When Conviction on Testimony of Accomplice Unwarranted. 7. Evidence in corroboration of that given by an accomplice which merely shows an opportunity on the part of defendant of having joined in the commission of an offense is insufficient, and where the facts and circumstances relied upon for corroboration are as consistent with innocence as with guilt, conviction on such evidence cannot stand. Same ? Robbery ? Conspiracy ? Insufficiency of Evidence in Corroboration of That of Accomplice to Warrant Conviction. 8. Evidence in a prosecution for robbery against one of three defendants, one of whom pleaded guilty, the second being convicted on a separate trial and upon whose testimony the state relied for conviction of appellant, reviewed and held insufficient as corroborating that given by the accomplice, it showing no more than an opportunity on the part of defendant to have conspired to commit the crime and a suspicion that he did so, and having been as consistent with his innocence as with guilt.

Download Ebook "State v. Jones" PDF ePub Kindle