Corpus delicti (Latin: “body of crime”) is a term from Western jurisprudence which refers to the principle that it must be proven that a crime has occurred before a person can be convicted of committing the crime.
For example, a person cannot be tried for larceny unless it can be proven that property has been stolen. Likewise, in order for a person to be tried for arson it must be proven that a criminal act resulted in the burning of a property. Black’s Law Dictionary (6th ed.) defines “corpus delicti” as: “the fact of a crime having been actually committed.”
In the Anglo-American legal system, the concept has its outgrowth in several principles. Many jurisdictions hold as a legal rule that a defendant’s out-of-court confession, alone, is not sufficient evidence to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See, e.g., Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 497 n.14, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963)(citing to corpus delicti rule and stating: “For the history and development of the corroboration requirement, see 7 Wigmore, Evidence [3d ed. 1940], §§ 2070-2071; Note, Proof of the Corpus Delicti Aliunde the Defendant’s Confession, 103 U. of Pa. L. Rev. 638-649 [1955]. For the present scope and application of the rule, see 2 Underhill, Criminal Evidence [5th ed. 1956], §§ 402-403.
For a comprehensive collection of cases, see Annot., 45 A. L. R.2d 1316 [1956].”) A corollary to this rule is that an accused cannot be convicted solely upon the testimony of an accomplice. Some jurisdictions also hold that without first showing independent corroboration that a crime happened, the prosecution may not introduce evidence of the defendant’s statement.
No comments:
Post a Comment