Barham v. United States

holding that a conviction, for aiding and abetting a forgery, of a defendant who supplied false identification must be based upon greater proof than that the defendant had “a generalized suspicion of illegal use of the identification” | “if on discovering justifiable dissatisfaction a court refuses to replace the attorney, the defendant may then properly claim denial of his Sixth Amendment right” | "if on discovering justifiable dissatisfaction a court refuses to replace the attorney, the defendant may then properly claim denial of his Sixth Amendment right" | counsel's absence because of illness during jury deliberations and return of verdict harmless | counsel’s absence because of illness during jury deliberations and return of verdict harmless | supplier of false identification must have known that it would be used in a transaction involving forged bonds in order to be guilty as an aider and abettor; generalized suspicion of illegal use would not suffice