This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D was arrested and tried for a violation of the Narcotics Act. D testified at trial making a general denial of all charges. D's motion for a direction of verdict and requests for rulings substantially to the same effect were denied. The court instructed the jury concerning the rules as to presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt and stated generally that its expression of opinion on the evidence was not binding on the jury and that it was their duty to disregard the court's opinion as to the facts if the jury did not agree with it. The court ruled as a matter of law that if the jury believed the evidence for the Government it might find the defendant guilty. The court then charged the jury telling them that because D wiped his hands during his testimony that was almost always an indication of lying. The judge stated that as a fact and then said, 'I think that every single word that man said, except when he agreed with the Government's testimony, was a lie.' The judge then told the jury his opinion of the evidence was not binding upon them. D excepted. D was found guilty and the appeals court affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.