Big-Time Charlie

Big-Time Charlie

 

D, prosecuted for passing counterfeit money, admits that he bought drinks at a bar for himself and two friends and paid for the drinks with a counterfeit $20 bill but claims ignorance that the bill was counterfeit. The only evidence against him on the issue of knowledge is testimony that while in the company of his two friends, D lit a cigar with a $20 bill. D moves for a directed verdict. How should the judge rule?

Copyright © 2024 The President and Fellows of Harvard College * Accessibility * Support * Request Access * Terms of Use