State v. Douglas
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
TERNUS, Justice.
It has long been the law in Iowa that one may not be convicted on the testimony of an accomplice alone. See Iowa R.Crim. P. 2.21(3); State v. Brandt, 242 Iowa 382, 388, 44 N.W.2d 690, 693 (1950).. A similar rule exists with respect to a defendant’s confession: “a confession standing alone will not warrant a criminal conviction unless other proof shows the defendant committed the crime.” State v. Polly, 657 N.W.2d 462, 466 (Iowa 2003); accord Iowa R.Crim. P. 2.21(4) (stating defendant’s uncorroborated confession will not support a conviction “unless made in open court”). Thus,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. PollySupreme Court of Iowa · 2003
- State v. WareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1983
- Jack Stanley, Thomas A. Warren, Isom Meyers, and Hubert Stanley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1957
- State v. BugelySupreme Court of Iowa · 1997
- State v. BerneySupreme Court of Iowa · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State Of Iowa Vs. Wayne Samuel BarnesSupreme Court of Iowa · 2010
- State of Iowa v. Albert GarciaCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2018
- State of Iowa v. Christopher YengerCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2018
- State of Iowa v. Devaris Marquis PerryCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2019
- State of Iowa v. Dijonis Burkett BrownCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2020
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.