Legal Opinion

State v. Liles-Heide

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided January 25, 1999No. 39976-4-IPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrosse, J.

— When a defendant testifies following the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s corpus delicti claim, an appellate court must review the record as a whole, including that testimony, to determine whether there was sufficient independent evidence to support a logical and reasonable inference that the charged crime occurred. Because the Snohomish County Superior Court erred when it refused to consider evidence presented by Liles-Heide establishing the sufficiency of the corpus delicti, we reverse and reinstate her conviction.

FACTS

On December 23, 1995, at approximately 10:30 p.m., a Snohomish…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. HamrickCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1978
  3. Dickerson v. Chadwell, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1991
  4. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1990
  5. State v. PennewellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1979

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. PietrzakCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
  2. State v. PietrzakCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
  3. State of Arizona v. Cesar Francisco RubianoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  4. State v. McPheeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
  5. State v. McPheeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API