## Facts

- A gas station on a U.S. Navy depot was burglarized, and the FBI investigated.
- The FBI focused on Curt Gustafson, a Marine; Ricky Davis, also a Marine and Gustafson’s acquaintance, was interviewed twice.
- At the second interview, an FBI agent prepared a written statement from notes, read it to Davis, and Davis signed it as “true and correct.”
- The signed statement reported that Gustafson told Davis he broke into the station and pointed out where he dumped the safe.
- Davis later testified under oath before a federal grand jury and denied knowledge of who committed the burglary and denied that Gustafson indicated involvement to him.
- Davis was indicted and convicted of perjury under 18 U.S.C. § 1621 based on the conflict between his grand jury testimony and the agent’s account, supported by the signed statement.
- At trial, Davis denied telling the agent incriminating information and claimed the statement introduced was not the same as what was read to him and that he only glanced at what he signed.

## Issues

1. Whether the two-witness rule for perjury under 18 U.S.C. § 1621 permits corroboration by a written statement prepared by an FBI agent but signed and adopted by the defendant.
2. Whether the agent’s testimony plus the defendant’s signed statement provided sufficient corroboration to sustain the perjury conviction.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The court held that Davis’s signed statement could serve as corroborating evidence under the two-witness rule.
- The court concluded the corroboration was sufficient because the signed statement, combined with the agent’s testimony, was inconsistent with Davis’s innocence.
- The court treated Davis’s claim that he did not read or adopt the statement as a credibility question for the jury.

## Legal Principles

- In prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 1621, falsity must be shown by either two independent witnesses or one witness plus corroborating evidence (the two-witness rule).
- Corroboration need not independently establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; it is enough if, with the direct testimony, it tends to show falsity and is inconsistent with innocence.
- A defendant’s out-of-court admissions, including a statement the defendant signs and adopts as true, may constitute corroborating evidence for purposes of the two-witness rule.
- When the defendant disputes whether a signed statement was knowingly adopted, resolution of that conflict generally rests with the jury.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit upheld Davis’s perjury conviction, ruling that a defendant’s signed, adopted statement may corroborate a single witness’s testimony under the § 1621 two-witness rule when the combined proof supports a finding that the sworn testimony was knowingly false.


United States v. Davis, 548 F.2d 840 (9th Cir. 1977)