The following excerpt is from United States v. Abrams, 427 F.2d 86 (2nd Cir. 1970):
Although appellant did not request a special instruction on accomplice testimony, he now claims that the failure to give such a charge also constituted plain error. It is preferable to charge the jury that accomplice testimony should be scrutinized with special care and caution. However this circuit does not require that the charge be given unless substantial prejudice results from its
[427 F.2d 91]
omission. See United States v. Cianchetti, 315 F.2d 584, 592 (2d Cir. 1963). The trial judge gave the usual instruction concerning the weight to be given to the testimony of witnesses as affected by their bias or interest in the case, and under the circumstances of this case, the omission of the special instruction on accomplice testimony does not justify reversal.[427 F.2d 91]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.