9 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 2012–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State of Tennessee v. Courtney Bishopgreen2 sentences2024Defendant, however, relies upon the traditional corpus delicti rule that our supreme court abandoned in favor of the “modified trustworthiness standard” more than ten years ago in State v. Bishop, 431 S.W.3d 22, 58 (Tenn. 2014). 2020Although counsel did not remember how often he met 4 See State v. Bishop, 431 S.W.3d 22, 61 (Tenn. 2014) (abandoning the traditional corpus delicti rule). -10- with the Petitioner, in general, he was able to meet and talk with criminal defendants in Shelby County once every thirty days. | 3 | 6 |
United States v. Browngreen2 sentences2014Under the modified trustworthiness standard, a defendant’s extrajudicial confession is sufficient to support a conviction only if the State introduces “independent proof of facts and circumstances which strengthen or bolster the confession and tend to generate a belief in its trustworthiness, plus independent proof of loss or injury.” State v. Lucas, 152 A.2d at 60 . 26 When the crime is of a type that does not result in a tangible injury, “the corroborative evidence must implicate the accused in order to show that a crime has been committed.” Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. at 154, 75 S.Ct. 2013In Wagner, the court explained that “th[e] rule requiring corroboration of a confession is known as the corpus delicti rule.” Id. at fn 9 (citing United States v. Brown, 617 F.3d 857, 860 (6th Cir. 2010)). | 2 | 3 |
Miller v. Stategreen2 sentences2020The traditional corpus delicti rule dictated that the State “need only corroborate the existence of the core injury associated with the crime, plus the fact that the injury did not occur accidentally or innocently.” Id. (citing Miller v. State, 380 Md. 1 , 843 A.2d 803, 830 (2004); 1 McCormick on Evidence § 146, at 810-11.). 2020The traditional corpus delicti rule dictated that the State “need only corroborate the existence of the core injury associated with the crime, plus the fact that the injury did not occur accidentally or innocently.” Id. (citing Miller v. State, 380 Md. 1 , 843 A.2d 803, 830 (2004); 1 McCormick on Evidence § 146, at 810-11.). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dowgreen1 sentence2014See People v. LaRosa, 293 P.3d at 575 ("[T]he corroboration requirement is not constitutionally mandated but requires the prosecution to present corroborating evidence of a defendant’s confession to assuage our long-standing concern about false confessions.”); State v. Suriner, 294 P.3d at 1099 ("The corpus delicti rule does not protect any statutory or constitutional rights.”); State v. Dow, 168 Wash.2d 243 , 227 P.3d 1278, 1280 (2010) ("[The corpus delicti rule] is judicially created and not constitutionally mandated.... [It] does not have a constitutional source.”) (quoting City of Bremerto | 1 | 1 |
State v. Todd James Surinergreen2 sentences2014See State v. Suriner, 154 Idaho 81 , 294 P.3d 1093, 1098-1100 (2013). 18 . 2014See People v. LaRosa, 293 P.3d at 575 ("[T]he corroboration requirement is not constitutionally mandated but requires the prosecution to present corroborating evidence of a defendant’s confession to assuage our long-standing concern about false confessions.”); State v. Suriner, 294 P.3d at 1099 ("The corpus delicti rule does not protect any statutory or constitutional rights.”); State v. Dow, 168 Wash.2d 243 , 227 P.3d 1278, 1280 (2010) ("[The corpus delicti rule] is judicially created and not constitutionally mandated.... [It] does not have a constitutional source.”) (quoting City of Bremerto | 1 | 1 |
People v. LaRosagreen2 sentences2014See United States v. Trombley, 733 F.2d 35, 37 (6th Cir.1984); People v. LaRosa, 2013 CO 2 ¶¶ 34-35 , 293 P.3d 567, 575-76 (Colo.2013), reh’g denied (Feb. 11, 2013). 2014See People v. LaRosa, 293 P.3d at 575 ("[T]he corroboration requirement is not constitutionally mandated but requires the prosecution to present corroborating evidence of a defendant’s confession to assuage our long-standing concern about false confessions.”); State v. Suriner, 294 P.3d at 1099 ("The corpus delicti rule does not protect any statutory or constitutional rights.”); State v. Dow, 168 Wash.2d 243 , 227 P.3d 1278, 1280 (2010) ("[The corpus delicti rule] is judicially created and not constitutionally mandated.... [It] does not have a constitutional source.”) (quoting City of Bremerto | 1 | 1 |
Ashby v. Stategreen2 sentences2014In the felony-murder case of State v. Shepherd, 902 S.W.2d 895, 901 (Tenn.1995), this Court established that “[t]he corpus delicti in a homicide case.... consists of two (2) elements: (1) the death of a human being and (2) criminal agency in producing that death.” See also Hall v. State, 361 Ark. 379 , 206 S.W.3d 830, 835 (2005) (“[S]o long as the corpus delicti of the homicide (i.e., death caused by a criminal agency) is established by independent evidence, the predicate felony may be shown by confession alone.”); Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911) (“[T]he corpu 2014In later cases, this Court observed that some independent evidence of the corpus delicti should be introduced before admitting the defendant’s confession into evidence, “[b]ut if the wrong order be followed ... it is not reversible error.” Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911); 21 see also Kyle v. State, 208 Tenn. 170, 173 , 344 S.W.2d 537, 538 (1961) (“[We held in Ashby v. State that] it was not necessary that this evidence of a corpus delicti precede the introduction of the confession though it was best to do so; but if it came in the wrong order the Court would n | 1 | 1 |
State v. Shepherdgreen1 sentence2014In the felony-murder case of State v. Shepherd, 902 S.W.2d 895, 901 (Tenn.1995), this Court established that “[t]he corpus delicti in a homicide case.... consists of two (2) elements: (1) the death of a human being and (2) criminal agency in producing that death.” See also Hall v. State, 361 Ark. 379 , 206 S.W.3d 830, 835 (2005) (“[S]o long as the corpus delicti of the homicide (i.e., death caused by a criminal agency) is established by independent evidence, the predicate felony may be shown by confession alone.”); Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911) (“[T]he corpu | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Laura Trombleygreen1 sentence2014See United States v. Trombley, 733 F.2d 35, 37 (6th Cir.1984); People v. LaRosa, 2013 CO 2 ¶¶ 34-35 , 293 P.3d 567, 575-76 (Colo.2013), reh’g denied (Feb. 11, 2013). | 1 | 1 |
Kyle v. Stategreen2 sentences2014In later cases, this Court observed that some independent evidence of the corpus delicti should be introduced before admitting the defendant’s confession into evidence, “[b]ut if the wrong order be followed ... it is not reversible error.” Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911); 21 see also Kyle v. State, 208 Tenn. 170, 173 , 344 S.W.2d 537, 538 (1961) (“[We held in Ashby v. State that] it was not necessary that this evidence of a corpus delicti precede the introduction of the confession though it was best to do so; but if it came in the wrong order the Court would n 2014In later cases, this Court observed that some independent evidence of the corpus delicti should be introduced before admitting the defendant’s confession into evidence, “[b]ut if the wrong order be followed ... it is not reversible error.” Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911); 21 see also Kyle v. State, 208 Tenn. 170, 173 , 344 S.W.2d 537, 538 (1961) (“[We held in Ashby v. State that] it was not necessary that this evidence of a corpus delicti precede the introduction of the confession though it was best to do so; but if it came in the wrong order the Court would n | 1 | 1 |
Hall v. Stategreen2 sentences2014In the felony-murder case of State v. Shepherd, 902 S.W.2d 895, 901 (Tenn.1995), this Court established that “[t]he corpus delicti in a homicide case.... consists of two (2) elements: (1) the death of a human being and (2) criminal agency in producing that death.” See also Hall v. State, 361 Ark. 379 , 206 S.W.3d 830, 835 (2005) (“[S]o long as the corpus delicti of the homicide (i.e., death caused by a criminal agency) is established by independent evidence, the predicate felony may be shown by confession alone.”); Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911) (“[T]he corpu 2014In the felony-murder case of State v. Shepherd, 902 S.W.2d 895, 901 (Tenn.1995), this Court established that “[t]he corpus delicti in a homicide case.... consists of two (2) elements: (1) the death of a human being and (2) criminal agency in producing that death.” See also Hall v. State, 361 Ark. 379 , 206 S.W.3d 830, 835 (2005) (“[S]o long as the corpus delicti of the homicide (i.e., death caused by a criminal agency) is established by independent evidence, the predicate felony may be shown by confession alone.”); Ashby v. State, 124 Tenn. 684, 698-99 , 139 S.W. 872 , 875 (1911) (“[T]he corpu | 1 | 1 |
State v. Mauchleygreen2 sentences2014See State v. Mauchley, 2003 UT 10 ¶ 16 , 67 P.3d 477, 482 (Utah 2003); State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 492-93 (1985); Kenneth S. Broun, 1 McCormick on Evidence § 146, at 810 (7th ed.2013). 2014See State v. Mauchley, 2003 UT 10 ¶ 16 , 67 P.3d 477, 482 (Utah 2003); State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 492-93 (1985); Kenneth S. Broun, 1 McCormick on Evidence § 146, at 810 (7th ed.2013). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Parkergreen2 sentences2014See State v. Mauchley, 2003 UT 10 ¶ 16 , 67 P.3d 477, 482 (Utah 2003); State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 492-93 (1985); Kenneth S. Broun, 1 McCormick on Evidence § 146, at 810 (7th ed.2013). 2014See State v. Mauchley, 2003 UT 10 ¶ 16 , 67 P.3d 477, 482 (Utah 2003); State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 492-93 (1985); Kenneth S. Broun, 1 McCormick on Evidence § 146, at 810 (7th ed.2013). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Houslergreen1 sentence2014State v. Housler, 193 S.W.3d at 490 ("Due Process is violated when the jury convicts on the basis of the defendant's confession absent corroborating evidence of the corpus delicti.”). | 1 | 1 |
City of Bremerton v. Corbettgreen2 sentences2014See People v. LaRosa, 293 P.3d at 575 ("[T]he corroboration requirement is not constitutionally mandated but requires the prosecution to present corroborating evidence of a defendant’s confession to assuage our long-standing concern about false confessions.”); State v. Suriner, 294 P.3d at 1099 ("The corpus delicti rule does not protect any statutory or constitutional rights.”); State v. Dow, 168 Wash.2d 243 , 227 P.3d 1278, 1280 (2010) ("[The corpus delicti rule] is judicially created and not constitutionally mandated.... [It] does not have a constitutional source.”) (quoting City of Bremerto 2014See People v. LaRosa, 293 P.3d at 575 ("[T]he corroboration requirement is not constitutionally mandated but requires the prosecution to present corroborating evidence of a defendant’s confession to assuage our long-standing concern about false confessions.”); State v. Suriner, 294 P.3d at 1099 ("The corpus delicti rule does not protect any statutory or constitutional rights.”); State v. Dow, 168 Wash.2d 243 , 227 P.3d 1278, 1280 (2010) ("[The corpus delicti rule] is judicially created and not constitutionally mandated.... [It] does not have a constitutional source.”) (quoting City of Bremerto | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. United States
green
2 sentences2014Although the rule was based on “the experience of the courts, the police[,] and the medical profession” that people sometimes make voluntary false confessions, the Court reasoned that the application of the corpus delicti rule “should be scrutinized lest the restrictions it imposes surpass the dangers which gave rise to them.” Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. at 153, 75 S.Ct. 194 . 2014The Court noted that tax evasion involves “no tangible injury which can be isolated as a corpus delicti.” Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. at 154, 75 S.Ct. 194 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Opper v. United States
green
2 sentences2014Although this Court long ago adopted the traditional corpus delicti rule, some Tennessee courts, including this one, have at times relied on the “trustworthiness” standard adopted by the United States Supreme Court in Opper v. United States, 348 U.S. 84 , 75 S.Ct. 158 , 99 L.Ed. 101 (1954). 2014Although this Court long ago adopted the traditional corpus delicti rule, some Tennessee courts, including this one, have at times relied on the “trustworthiness” standard adopted by the United States Supreme Court in Opper v. United States, 348 U.S. 84 , 75 S.Ct. 158 , 99 L.Ed. 101 (1954). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Lucas
green
1 sentence2014Under the modified trustworthiness standard, a defendant’s extrajudicial confession is sufficient to support a conviction only if the State introduces “independent proof of facts and circumstances which strengthen or bolster the confession and tend to generate a belief in its trustworthiness, plus independent proof of loss or injury.” State v. Lucas, 152 A.2d at 60 . 26 When the crime is of a type that does not result in a tangible injury, “the corroborative evidence must implicate the accused in order to show that a crime has been committed.” Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. at 154, 75 S.Ct. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Dow
green
1 sentence2014See People v. LaRosa, 293 P.3d at 575 ("[T]he corroboration requirement is not constitutionally mandated but requires the prosecution to present corroborating evidence of a defendant’s confession to assuage our long-standing concern about false confessions.”); State v. Suriner, 294 P.3d at 1099 ("The corpus delicti rule does not protect any statutory or constitutional rights.”); State v. Dow, 168 Wash.2d 243 , 227 P.3d 1278, 1280 (2010) ("[The corpus delicti rule] is judicially created and not constitutionally mandated.... [It] does not have a constitutional source.”) (quoting City of Bremerto | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence2013In Wagner, the court explained that “th[e] rule requiring corroboration of a confession is known as the corpus delicti rule.” Id. at fn 9 (citing United States v. Brown, 617 F.3d 857, 860 (6th Cir. 2010)). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.