corpus delicti rule in Utah

2005ANALYSIS A. Kooyman’s Admission ¶ 66 In my view, the State did not present enough evidence to satisfy the corpus delicti rule, which was in effect at the time of Kooyman’s trial. 2 See State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (“The corpus delicti rule states that before a defendant’s inculpatory statements can be introduced as evidence against the defendant, the State must prove the occurrence of a crime, i.e., a corpus delicti.”).

2005ANALYSIS A. Kooyman's Admission ¶ 66 In my view, the State did not present enough evidence to satisfy the corpus delicti rule, which was in effect at the time of Kooyman's trial. [2] See State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) ("The corpus delicti rule states that before a defendant's inculpatory statements can be introduced as evidence against the defendant, the State must prove the occurrence of a crime, i.e., a corpus delicti.").

2003The purpose of this corroboration rule is to prevent innocent persons from being convict ed when they falsely confess to committing " 'a crime that was never committed or was committed by someone else.' " State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 491 (1985) (quoting State v. Franklin, 308 N.C. 682 , 304 S.E.2d 579, 586 (1983)); see also State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (describing the corpus delicti rule "as a 'safeguard against convicting the innocent on the strength of false confessions' ") (quoting Weldon, 6 Utah 2d at 373 , 314 P.2d at 354 ). {13 Although the exact o

2003The purpose of this corroboration rule is to prevent innocent persons from being convict ed when they falsely confess to committing " 'a crime that was never committed or was committed by someone else.' " State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 491 (1985) (quoting State v. Franklin, 308 N.C. 682 , 304 S.E.2d 579, 586 (1983)); see also State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (describing the corpus delicti rule "as a 'safeguard against convicting the innocent on the strength of false confessions' ") (quoting Weldon, 6 Utah 2d at 373 , 314 P.2d at 354 ). {13 Although the exact o

2003The purpose of this corroboration rule is to prevent innocent persons from being convict ed when they falsely confess to committing " 'a crime that was never committed or was committed by someone else.' " State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 491 (1985) (quoting State v. Franklin, 308 N.C. 682 , 304 S.E.2d 579, 586 (1983)); see also State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (describing the corpus delicti rule "as a 'safeguard against convicting the innocent on the strength of false confessions' ") (quoting Weldon, 6 Utah 2d at 373 , 314 P.2d at 354 ). {13 Although the exact o

2003The purpose of this corroboration rule is to prevent innocent persons from being convict ed when they falsely confess to committing " 'a crime that was never committed or was committed by someone else.' " State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 491 (1985) (quoting State v. Franklin, 308 N.C. 682 , 304 S.E.2d 579, 586 (1983)); see also State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (describing the corpus delicti rule "as a 'safeguard against convicting the innocent on the strength of false confessions' ") (quoting Weldon, 6 Utah 2d at 373 , 314 P.2d at 354 ). {13 Although the exact o

2005Cf. State v. Russum, 107 Utah 94 , 152 P.2d 88, 90 (1944) (holding that the defendant's right to a fair trial was prejudiced by the trial court's erroneous admission of evidence of his prior convictions). [4] The trial court did attempt to explain its decision to admit the bad acts evidence during its ruling on Kooyman's motion for a new trial.

2005Cf. State v. Russum, 107 Utah 94 , 152 P.2d 88, 90 (1944) (holding that the defendant's right to a fair trial was prejudiced by the trial court's erroneous admission of evidence of his prior convictions). [4] The trial court did attempt to explain its decision to admit the bad acts evidence during its ruling on Kooyman's motion for a new trial.

2003We therefore overturn the corpus delicti rule. 147 Although we overturn the corpus de-licti rule, we are not eliminating the corroboration rule because we recognize the need still exists "to prevent 'errors in convictions based upon untrue confessions alone.! " United States v. Dickerson, 163 F.3d 639, 641 (D.C.Cir.1999) (quoting Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. 147, 153 , 75 S.Ct. 194 , 99 L.Ed. 192 (1954)) (other citations omitted).

2003Id. {61 In summary, we adopt the trustworthiness standard in place of the corpus delicti rule.

2003State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1163 (Utah 1991); State v. Talbot, 665 P.2d 1274, 1275 (Utah 1983).

2003Id.

2003Finally, in United States v. Dickerson, 163 F.3d 639, 642 (D.C.Cic.1999), the court stated that the corroboration rule is "something of a hybrid rule having elements both of admissibility and sufficiency." See also State v. Ray, 130 Wash.2d 673 , 926 P.2d 904, 908 (1996) (Talmadge, J., concurring) (arguing that the corpus delicti rule should be abandoned, contrary to the majority decision, but that it should be abandoned only prospectively due to the Ex Post Facto Clause). 178 Hence, we conclude the trustworthiness standard pertains not just to the admissibility, but also to the sufficiency of

2003See State v. Daugherty, 173 Ariz. 548 , 845 P.2d 474, 477-78 (Ct.App.1992) (excluding application of the corpus delicti rule to various crimes).

2003See State v. Daugherty, 173 Ariz. 548 , 845 P.2d 474, 477-78 (Ct.App.1992) (excluding application of the corpus delicti rule to various crimes).

2003"Those asking us to overturn prior precedent have a substantial burden of persuasion" due to "the doctrine of stare decisis." State v. Menzies, 889 P.2d 393, 398 (Utah 1994) (citation omitted).

2003As long as we adhere to this version of the corroboration rule, however, it is difficult to see how such consequences can be avoided. 32 The corpus delicti rule obstructs justice, in part, because it makes "irrational distinctions and [yields] incongruous results." American Fork City v. Crosgrove, 701 P.2d 1069, 1074 (Utah 1985) (abandoning a different rule because it yielded irrational results).

2003As long as we adhere to this version of the corroboration rule, however, it is difficult to see how such consequences can be avoided. 32 The corpus delicti rule obstructs justice, in part, because it makes "irrational distinctions and [yields] incongruous results." American Fork City v. Crosgrove, 701 P.2d 1069, 1074 (Utah 1985) (abandoning a different rule because it yielded irrational results).

2003The purpose of this corroboration rule is to prevent innocent persons from being convict ed when they falsely confess to committing " 'a crime that was never committed or was committed by someone else.' " State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 491 (1985) (quoting State v. Franklin, 308 N.C. 682 , 304 S.E.2d 579, 586 (1983)); see also State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (describing the corpus delicti rule "as a 'safeguard against convicting the innocent on the strength of false confessions' ") (quoting Weldon, 6 Utah 2d at 373 , 314 P.2d at 354 ). {13 Although the exact o

2003The purpose of this corroboration rule is to prevent innocent persons from being convict ed when they falsely confess to committing " 'a crime that was never committed or was committed by someone else.' " State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 491 (1985) (quoting State v. Franklin, 308 N.C. 682 , 304 S.E.2d 579, 586 (1983)); see also State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162 (Utah 1991) (describing the corpus delicti rule "as a 'safeguard against convicting the innocent on the strength of false confessions' ") (quoting Weldon, 6 Utah 2d at 373 , 314 P.2d at 354 ). {13 Although the exact o

2003In Roach v. Commonwealth, 251 Va. 324 , 468 S.E.2d 98, 110 (1996), the court held that because both the corpus delicti of a homicide and the corpus delicti of robbery were established by independent evidence, the corpus delicti of capital murder was sufficiently corroborated.

2003In Roach v. Commonwealth, 251 Va. 324 , 468 S.E.2d 98, 110 (1996), the court held that because both the corpus delicti of a homicide and the corpus delicti of robbery were established by independent evidence, the corpus delicti of capital murder was sufficiently corroborated.

2001"However, the trial court's underlying findings of fact regarding the corpus delicti will be overturned ouly if clearly erroneous." State v. Nguyen, 878 P.2d 1183, 1186 (Utah Ct.App.1994). {18 Defendant also argues the evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that she obstructed justice.

1994State v. Johnson, 821 P.2d 1150, 1162-63 (Utah 1991); State v. Weldon, 6 Utah 2d 372, 373 , 314 P.2d 353, 354 (1957); State v. Hansen, 857 P.2d 978, 980 (Utah App.1993).

1994See State v. Ramirez, 817 P.2d 774, 782 (Utah 1991).

1991E.g., Rollins v. Petersen, 813 P.2d 1156, 1159 (Utah 1991); Landes v. Capital City Bank, 795 P.2d 1127, 1129 (Utah 1990).

1991E.g., Rollins v. Petersen, 813 P.2d 1156, 1159 (Utah 1991); Landes v. Capital City Bank, 795 P.2d 1127, 1129 (Utah 1990).

1991State v. Johnson, 95 Utah 572, 579-80 , 83 P.2d 1010, 1014 (1938), overruled on other grounds, State v. Crank, 105 Utah 332, 355 , 142 P.2d 178, 188 (1943).

1991State v. Johnson, 95 Utah 572, 579-80 , 83 P.2d 1010, 1014 (1938), overruled on other grounds, State v. Crank, 105 Utah 332, 355 , 142 P.2d 178, 188 (1943).

1991State v. Johnson, 95 Utah 572, 579-80 , 83 P.2d 1010, 1014 (1938), overruled on other grounds, State v. Crank, 105 Utah 332, 355 , 142 P.2d 178, 188 (1943).

1991State v. Johnson, 95 Utah 572, 579-80 , 83 P.2d 1010, 1014 (1938), overruled on other grounds, State v. Crank, 105 Utah 332, 355 , 142 P.2d 178, 188 (1943).

1991See Petree, 659 P.2d at 447 .