Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Morgan, 61 P.3d 460.

27 citing documents.

State v. Stoner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Stoner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
In Arizona, “a defendant may not be convicted of a crime based on an uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti.” ¶ 15 (App. 2002) (citing cases).
State v. Morphis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Morphis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
8 STATE v. MORPHIS Decision of the Court He cites two cases:
State v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
The corpus delicti doctrine prevents a defendant from being convicted based on his "uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti, or the 'body of the crime.'" ¶ 15 (App. 2002).
State v. MacIel 358 P.3d 621 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. MacIel 358 P.3d 621 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 28 “A defendant may not be convicted of a crime based on an uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti, or the ‘body of the crime.’ ” 4 ¶ 15 , ( , and Jones, 198 Ariz. at 2, ¶ 12 , 6 P.3d at 307 ).
State of Arizona v. Michael Jonathon Carlson 351 P.3d 1079 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Michael Jonathon Carlson 351 P.3d 1079 Ariz. 2015
¶10 Although this Court has never adopted the trustworthiness doctrine, –72 ¶¶ 17–21, –66 (App. 2002).
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Thus, “[a] defendant may not be convicted of a crime based on an uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti, or the ‘body of the crime.’” ¶ 15, ( ¶ 13, ) (italics added).
State of Arizona v. Antone Alex Gill 319 P.3d 248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Antone Alex Gill 319 P.3d 248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
This common law rule prevents a defendant from being convicted “based upon ‘an uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti, or the body of the crime.’” -73 (App. 2007), We cite the versions of the criminal statutes in effect at the time of Gill’s offenses.
State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee Cota 319 P.3d 242 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee Cota 319 P.3d 242 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
(recognizing failure to file reply brief on issue presented in answering brief as sufficient basis for rejecting appellant’s position); Ariz. Dep’t of Pub.
State of Arizona v. Frank Joseph Sarullo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State of Arizona v. Frank Joseph Sarullo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
¶7 “A defendant may not be convicted of a crime based on an uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti, or the ‘body of the crime.’”
State of Arizona v. Rachel Marie Vallejo 158 P.3d 916 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Cesar Francisco Rubiano 150 P.3d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Cesar Francisco Rubiano 150 P.3d 271 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
In denying the corpus delicti claim, the trial court correctly summarized the rule as requiring “corroborative evidence that an offense occurred independent of Defendant’s confession.” See State v. Morgan, 204 Ariz. 166, ¶¶ 14-18, -65 (App. 2002).
State of Arizona v. Ricky Lee Sabin 146 P.3d 577 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
State of Arizona v. Ricky Lee Sabin 146 P.3d 577 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
“The state ‘must establish the corpus delicti by showing proof of a crime and that someone is 18 responsible for that crime.’”
State v. Nieves 87 P.3d 851 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State v. Nieves 87 P.3d 851 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
2 ¶ 7 “A defendant may not be convicted of a crime based upon an uncorroborated confession without independent proof of the corpus delicti, or the ‘body of the crime.’ ” ¶ 15
State v. Lucero 85 P.3d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State v. Lucero 85 P.3d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004