United States v. Murray Bernard Weiner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• evidence that corroborates incidental facts in witness’s testimony insufficient to satisfy two-witness rule; evidence must be independent and inconsistent with innocence of accused
• rule not satisfied by witness’s notation of phone call used to refresh recollection
• “[T]he two-witness rule is satisfied by corroborative evidence of sufficient content and quality to persuade the trier that what the principal prosecution witness testified to about the falsity of the accused’s statement under oath was correct.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).