What is the burden of proving a crime committed without trial?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Mendoza (In re Mendoza), (Cal. App. 2013):

"In every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove the corpus delicti, or the body of the crime itselfi.e., the fact of injury, loss, or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause. In California, it has traditionally been held, the prosecution cannot satisfy this burden by relying exclusively upon the extrajudicial statements, confessions, or admissions of the defendant. [Citations.] Though mandated by no statute, and never deemed a constitutional guaranty, the rule requiring some independent proof of the corpus delicti has roots in the common law. [Citation.] California decisions have applied it at least since the 1860's . . . . [] . . . This rule is intended to ensure that one will not be falsely convicted, by his or her untested words alone, of a crime that never happened. [Citations.]" (People v. Alvarez (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168-1169, fn. omitted.)

Other Questions


What is the burden of proving a crime committed without trial? (California, United States of America)
If a criminal commits a crime in a different county than the one where the crime was committed, would that change the outcome of the criminal trial if the crime occurred in the other county? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a finding that a crime committed by appellant was committed with the specific intent to commit a crime against a specific gang member? (California, United States of America)
What is the burden of proving a crime committed without the consent of the accused? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for proving a crime committed without trial? (California, United States of America)
Can a jury use uncharged crime evidence to determine that defendant was more likely to have committed the charged crimes because he committed the uncharged crimes? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant admits committing a crime but denies the necessary intent for the charged crime because of mistake or accident, is intent to commit the crime admissible? (California, United States of America)
How has the court interpreted other-crimes evidence in a trial where a defendant admitted that he had committed a crime against a witness? (California, United States of America)
Does a statute retroactively increase the punishment for a crime committed after the crime has been committed violate the ex post facto clause? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.