The corpus delicti rule is the legal principle that no one can be convicted of a crime without proof that the crime actually occurred. In California, this proof must be independent of the defendant’s out-of-court statements, even if they amounted to a confession. The name of the rule is Latin for “body of the crime.”
The corpus delicti rule
The corpus delicti is a legal principle in criminal law. It requires that the crime be proven to have occurred before someone can be convicted for it. This forces law enforcement to prove that:
- someone was hurt or harmed in a particular way, and
- criminal agency or illegal acts caused that harm.
Together, these 2 things are the body of the crime.
For example, if you are accused of theft, prosecutors must prove that property was stolen. Until this is shown, you cannot be charged with the offense.
The scope of the rule was altered by California Proposition 8 back in June, 1982. This amended the California Constitution to include a “truth-in-evidence” rule.[1]
Evidence that satisfies the rule in California
In California, corpus delicti must be established in every case. Furthermore, it cannot be established solely on the defendant’s extrajudicial statements.[2]
These out-of-court statements include a defendant’s confession. It also includes statements made by codefendants or accomplices in the same criminal case.
This means that California prosecutors must present independent evidence that indicates that the crime occurred. That evidence can include:
- direct evidence that the crime was committed, or
- circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence could be:
- surveillance footage of the offense,
- eyewitness accounts of the crime,
- photos of an assault victim’s injuries, or
- the body of a victim of homicide.
Circumstantial evidence could be:
- your possession of stolen property,
- your fingerprints at the crime scene, or
- your presence at the scene of the crime.
The particular nature of that evidence will depend on the criminal offense to be charged. For example:
- cases of driving under the influence (DUI) would require something like a failed breath test, field sobriety test, or a police officer’s testimony,
- theft offenses would require evidence that the property was stolen, such as a statement by the alleged victim, and
- homicide cases would require evidence that the death was the result of a crime, such as the results of an autopsy.
The amount of evidence needed to satisfy California’s corpus delicti rule is small. It only needs to support a reasonable inference that a crime occurred.[3] This prima facie showing is a far easier burden of proof to clear than beyond a reasonable doubt. The rule also does not demand an independent showing of evidence for every element of the crime.[4]
Once the corpus delicti rule is satisfied, the defendant’s out-of-court statements can be used as evidence against him or her.[5]
For example: Police respond to a vehicle on the side of the road. The car has a flat tire. 2 people are nearby, both under the influence of alcohol. One of them admits to drunk driving. This statement cannot be used until the corpus delicti rule is satisfied. The flat tire is sufficient proof of the corpus delicti, though: It is circumstantial evidence that the vehicle was being driven, and that one of the inebriated people on the scene was driving it.[6]
While rare, the corpus delicti rule could be a valuable legal defense to raise. A criminal defense lawyer from a reputable law firm can help.
Purpose of the rule
The main goal of the corpus delicti rule is to prevent someone from admitting to a crime that did not occur. By doing so, it prevents law enforcement from securing convictions based solely on a confession. This reduces the incentive for police to coerce someone into making a confession, protecting your constitutional rights. It also reduces the odds that mentally unstable people would be convicted for confessing to a crime that they did not commit or that never happened.[7]
Practically, it also means that you cannot be subjected to the stress of a criminal trial without independent proof of the crime. By invoking the corpus delicti rule, your defense attorney can demand that the case be dismissed at the preliminary hearing.
Exceptions to the rule
In California, there is a limited exception to the corpus delicti rule. This only applies to a particular sentencing enhancement for a particular type of first-degree murder: felony murder. Felony murder is one form of first-degree murder with special circumstances.
That enhancement increases the penalties of a conviction if the murder occurred during the commission of one of the following felonies:
- robbery,
- kidnapping,
- rape,
- sodomy,
- performing a lewd or lascivious act on a child under the age of 14,
- oral copulation,
- burglary,
- arson,
- train wrecking,
- mayhem,
- rape by instrument, or
- [8]
If you are convicted for first-degree murder in trial court, this exception to corpus delicti would apply to your sentencing. Prosecutors who want to impose the sentencing enhancement would not have to provide independent evidence of the other offense. They could rely on your out-of-court statement or confession that you committed one of the eligible offenses that triggers the sentencing enhancement.
This sentencing enhancement eliminates the possibility of a prison sentence of 25 years to life. The only remaining possibilities are:
- the death penalty, or
- life in prison without the possibility of parole.[9]
Legal Citations:
[1] Proposition 8 (1982), which amended Cal. Const. Art. I, § 28(d).
[2] California Criminal Jury Instructions (CALCRIM) No. 359.
[3] People v. Lara, 30 Cal.App.4th 658 (1994).
[4] People v. Alvarez, 27 Cal.4th 1161 (2002).
[5] Supra note 2.
[6] Facts from People v. McNorton, 91 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1 (2001).
[7] Jones v. Superior Court, 96 Cal.App.3d 390 (1979).
[8] California Penal Code sections 190.41 and 190.2(a)(17) PEN.
