State v. Liles-Heide
Court of Appeals of Washington
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
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- State v. HamrickCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1978
- Dickerson v. Chadwell, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1991
- State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1990
- State v. PennewellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. PietrzakCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
- State v. PietrzakCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
- State of Arizona v. Cesar Francisco RubianoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- State v. McPheeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
- State v. McPheeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.