Sex crime conviction reversed, where no evidence corroborated the confession

March 05, 2014

Sex crime conviction reversed, where no evidence corroborated the confession

Article provided by Hart Taylor
Visit us at http://www.hartdefense.com/Criminal-Defense/

In order to convict an individual of a crime, the prosecution must show the individual committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Under Virginia law, part of that proof includes proving the "corpus delicti" of the crime--that is, proving enough facts that show the crime charged was actually perpetrated.

This is especially important in the area of sex crimes, where the mere accusation of wrongdoing can have far-reaching consequences for the accused. The concept of corpus delicti even applies to an alleged confession, as shown by the recent Virginia Supreme Court case of Allen v. Commonwealth.

A confession alleged

The defendant allegedly confessed to his daughter that he engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior with his grandson. He later allegedly repeated this confession to City of Lynchburg police officers.

At the trial, the defendant pled not guilty, but was convicted of aggravated sexual battery and sentenced to seven years and six months in prison, with seven years suspended upon good behavior and intensive supervised probation.

The defendant appealed this conviction, arguing that the prosecution had failed to prove the corpus delicti of the crime by failing to sufficiently corroborate the defendant's confession.

No corroboration of the confession

The Virginia Supreme Court explained that in every criminal case, the prosecution must introduce evidence independent of any alleged confession to prove that the confessed crime actually occurred. The rule exists to avoid innocent individuals from being erroneously convicted of crimes on the basis of a false confession. An accused cannot be convicted solely on the basis of an uncorroborated confession.

"Slight collaboration," at least, must be provided, which may be proven by either direct or circumstantial evidence. If the facts offered are equally as consistent with the non-commission of the crime as with its commission, then slight corroboration has not been proven.

Here, the defendant allegedly made a confession to having committed aggravated sexual battery, but the only other substantive evidence was the testimony of the defendant's daughter. The daughter and her husband and son lived in the basement, while the defendant and other family members lived upstairs. The grandson would sometimes sleep in the same bed with both his grandmother and the defendant, though occasionally the grandson would sleep alone with the defendant. The defendant and his grandson also occasionally engaged in wrestling.

However, no physical evidence or eyewitness testimony was presented. The circumstantial evidence only established the defendant's mere opportunity to commit the crime, which was insufficient to establish slight corroboration. The allegations of sleeping next to his grandson and wrestling were just as consistent with non-commission of the crime as it was with its commission.

The prosecution failed to prove even slight corroboration of the alleged confession, and the criminal charges against the defendant were therefore vacated.

A comprehensive approach

If you are accused of a sex crime, you need an attorney willing to fight to protect your rights. Seek an attorney who will take a comprehensive approach to your case and who will work hard to develop and present an effective defense.