State v. Dyson

— Eddie Dyson appeals the judgment and sentence entered following his jury conviction for promot*762ing prostitution in the second degree. He contends the trial court erred in admitting statements he made to the undercover officer during negotiations for the sexual act. He maintains the statements were not corroborated by independent proof under the corpus delicti rule. Holding the corpus delicti rule is not applicable because Dyson’s statements during the commission of the crime did not constitute a confession, we affirm.

Facts

Detective Lishner was working undercover in Seattle as a “john.” He…