Quercia v. United States, 289 U.S. 466 (1933)

U.S. Supreme Court, (May 29, 1933)

Docket number: 701

/us/289/466/case.html
Permanent Link: http://supreme.vlex.com/vid/20017286
Id. vLex: VLEX-20017286

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Supreme Court - Lakeside v. Oregon, 435 U.S. 333 (1978)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - Kenneth Jerry Nunley, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pettway Oil Company, Defendant-Appellee., 346 F.2d 95 (6th Cir. 1965)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francesco Michienzi Et Al., Defendants-Appellants., 630 F.2d 455 (6th Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clyde Coy Jordan, Defendant-Appellant., 454 F.2d 323 (7th Cir. 1971)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ben H. Logan, Defendant-Appellant., 414 F.2d 230 (6th Cir. 1969)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Earl William Harding, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 335 F.2d 515 (9th Cir. 1964)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - the Travelers Insurance Company, Appellant, v. Ray Ryan, Appellee., 416 F.2d 362 (5th Cir. 1969)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit - DON KING PRODUCTIONS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JAMES ANDRE SMITH a/k/a JAMES ANDRE PRINCE, RAP-A-LOT RECORDS INC., PRINCE TOWN Don King Productions v. James Andre Smith a/k/a James Andre Prince et al, Page Pamela Page, James Pages mother, became Pages co (2nd Cir. 2002)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit - Irene B. Wabisky, Individually and as Ancillary Administratrix of the Estate of Joseph L. Wabisky, Deceased, Appellant, v. D. C. Transit System, Inc., a Corporation, Appellee., 326 F.2d 658 (D.C. Cir. 1963)

Text:

U.S. Supreme Court QUERCIA v. UNITED STATES, 289 U.S. 466 (1933)

[Page 289 U.S. 466, 472]

that 'wiping' one's hands while testifying was 'almost always an indication of lying.' Why it should be so, he was unable to say, but it was 'the fact.' He did not review the evidence to assist the jury in reaching the truth, but in a sweeping denunciation repudiated as a lie all that the accused had said in his own behalf which conflicted with the statements of the government's witnesses. This was error and we cannot doubt that it was highly prejudicial.

Nor do we think that the error was cured by the statement of the trial judge that his opinion of the evidence was not binding on the jury and that if they did not agree with it they should find the defendant not guilty. His definite and concrete assertion of fact, which he had made with all the persuasiveness of judicial utterance, as to the basis of his opinion, was not withdrawn. His characterization of the manner and testimony of the accused was of a sort most likely to remain firmly lodged in the memory of the jury and to excite a prejudice which would preclude a fair and dispassionate consideration of the evidence. Starr v. United States, supra; Mullen v. United States, supra; Wallace v. United States (C. C.A.) 291 F. 972, 974; Parker v. United States, supra; O'Shaughnessy v. United States, supra; Leslie v. United States (C.C.A.) 43 F.(2d) 288, 289.

The judgment must be reversed.

It is so ordered.

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access