What is the test for establishing that the only evidence connecting appellant with the crime was uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Belton, 136 Cal.Rptr. 54, 66 Cal.App.3d 636 (Cal. App. 1977):
In this case the only evidence connecting appellant with the crime was the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. Proof of the connection of defendant with the commission of the crime cannot rest on uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. (People v. Neely, 163 Cal.App.2d 289, 301, 329 P.2d 357.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Does evidence of flight connected defendants with the commission of the crime and thus corroborated the testimony of an accomplice? (California, United States of America)
What is the law on unanimity in a criminal case where the evidence of a crime is only a single crime but the evidence supports the theory of the crime? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing that a defendant has committed a crime committed while an accomplice is also involved in the crime? (California, United States of America)
Does the prosecution have to avoid using relevant, persuasive evidence to prove an element of a crime because that element might also be established through other evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does a jury need to be instructed that an accomplice's testimony regarding the circumstances of a crime of previous crime must be viewed with caution? (California, United States of America)
When an accomplice is called as a witness by the prosecution, is the jury required to distrust the testimony of their accomplice's testimony? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)
Does a jury need to be instructed that an accomplice's testimony regarding the circumstances of a crime of previous crime must be viewed with caution? (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)
Can a defendant be held criminally responsible as an accomplice not only for the crime he intended to do but also for any other crime that is a natural and probable consequence of the crime? (California, United States of America)
