31 Me. 355
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided July 1, 1850
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1850-07-01
Exceptions from the District Court, Rice, J. presiding. Indictment for larceny, William Vanner was introduced by the government, and testified that he saw the defendant commit the act; and that he himself aided and assisted in the commission of it. There was some testimony corroborating, and some testimony impeaching, that of Vanner.
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 2016
3 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1850-07-01
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1There is no positive rule of law, that a jury may not convict upon the unsupported testimony of a particeps criminis. There may be cases, hr which an -omission, by the- Judge, to advise the jury to look with great .suspicion, on such testimony, might be deemed a neglect of duty. Each case has its peculiar circumstances, with reference ■to which the Judge should exercise a sound discretion, in advising the jury.
¶2This case being put upon strict legal right, the
¶3Exceptions are overruled.