Barnett v. Government of Canal Zone
This text of 25 F.2d 459 (Barnett v. Government of Canal Zone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Barnett was convicted of conspiracy to steal a quantity of paint that was a part of the stores of a ship at Cristobal, Canal Zone.
A number of the ship’s crew were included in the indictment, and some of them took the stand, admitted their own guilt, and testified that they stole the paint under an agreement that Barnett would buy it from them. Their testimony was not corroborated by any other witness or by any circumstance.
Barnett denied that he had participated in the larceny, and claimed that he bought the paint after it had been taken from the ship and brought to his store.
Under the laws of the Canal Zone, a conviction cannot be had on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, and corroboration is not sufficient which merely shows commission of the offense charged. Laws of the Canal Zone (Laws 1904-05, p. 188), § 197. As the testimony of the accomplices was uncorroborated, it follows that Barnett’s conviction is pot supported by competent evidence.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 F.2d 459, 1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 2991, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnett-v-government-of-canal-zone-ca5-1928.