US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

While in this case there was no witness to the homicide and the identification of the body found was not perfect, owing to its condition caused by its having been partially burned, yet, as the circumstantial evidence was clearly enough to warrant the jury in finding that the body was that of the person alleged to have been murdered and that he had been killed by defendant, the trial court would not have been justified in withdrawing the case from the jury, but properly overruled a motion to instruct a verdict of not guilty for lack of proof of the corpus delicti.

In the absence of positive proof, but where there is circumstantial evidence of the corpus delicti, it is not error to submit to the jury the question of defendant's guilt with the instruction that the circumstantial evidence chanrobles.com-red

Page 205 U. S. 87

must be such a to satisfy the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the corpus delicti has been established.

The testimony of a marshal as to conversations between him and the defendant charged with murder which were voluntary, and not induced by duress, intimidation, or other improper influences, is admissible.

Whether in a criminal trial the court interpreter should be appointed is a matter largely resting in the discretion of the court, and its refusal so to do is not an error where it does not appear that the discretion was in any way abused.

The facts are stated in the opinion. chanrobles.com-red

Page 205 U. S. 88