United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
531 F.2d 214 (4th Cir. 1976)
Robert Lee Karnes (defendant) was charged with possessing a stolen car. The two witnesses vital to the prosecution’s case were Fred Cassity, Karnes’s co-defendant, and Cassity’s wife. The prosecution chose not to call them to testify because they previously had made conflicting statements and had withheld information. Over Karnes’s objection, however, the district court called the Cassitys as witnesses on its own and allowed both sides to cross-examine them. The district court did not explain to the jury why the court had called the Cassitys and not one of the parties. The jury convicted Karnes. He appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Winter, J.)
Concurrence (Widener, J.)
Dissent (Russell, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 204,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.