Brief Fact Summary. After being indicted upon the hearsay testimony of three IRS agents, Petitioner sought to have his trial and conviction overturned because the agents had no personal knowledge of the truth of the information upon which they testified.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Hearsay evidence is admissible to obtain an indictment when its acceptable counterpart is to be presented at trial.
Issue. Whether a defendant should be required to stand trial and a conviction be sustained where only hearsay evidence was presented to the grand jury upon his indictment.
Held. While the evidence is admittedly hearsay, it may be used to obtain an indictment, provided non-hearsay evidence can be produced at trial.
Concurrence. Justice Burton concurred, noting that substantial and rationally persuasive evidence was presented to the grand jury, and it was later back up with its counterparts which were exceptions to the hearsay rule.
Its adoption in our Constitution as the sole method for preferring charges in serious criminal cases shows the high place it held as an instrument of justice.View Full Point of Law