CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Hearsay Exceptions re Statements
......Co-Defendant (Crim.) Admissions
.........Accomplice Testimony
20 Cards On This Topic:

By electing not to have jury instructed by CALJIC No. 3.19, D waived his chance for the jury to decide whether his nephew was an accomplice, and could not on appeal claim the benefit of accomplice corroboration rules.

Single robbery conviction reversed as accomplice's testimony was uncorroborated, but penalty judgment stands given the nature of D2's additional crimes and lack of reasonable possibility of a different judgment.

Trial ct. properly instructed that jury had to decide whether W was an accomplice whose testimony was or was not corroborated, or that he was not involved, in which case no corroboration required.

No error in denying directed verdict request where there was sufficient independent corroboration tying D to the crimes to render admissible the testimony of the accomplices.

Strong evidence, along with D's flight as consciousness of guilt, corroborated testimony of D's accomplices and connected him with robbery and murders; CALJIC No. 3.11 standard accurately states law on corroboration.

Assuming jury found A was a mere accomplice, sufficient physical evidence and witnesses corroborated his testimony under PC 1111.

Whether or not evidence implicated W as an aider and abettor and trial court should have delivered accomplice instructions, it was not reasonably probable result would have been different absent such error.

Trial court did not err in accomplice instructions—witness' acts did not establish he was an accomplice to robbery ••as a matter of law•• because record contained conflicting evidence on his intent.

Ample evidence corroborated co-D's testimony, which was properly admitted and provided substantial evidence identifying D as person who committed murder and sodomy of his mother.

There was sufficient evidence to corroborate testimony of accomplices.

Harmless error, if any, not to instruct that accomplice’ testimony required corroboration where it was sufficiently corroborated by D’s testimony itself.

Substantial independent evidence corroborated accomplice's trial testimony and supported D's convictions as well as findings on special circumstances.

Numerous phone communications between D and accomplice, shortly before and after murder, as well as other evidence, sufficient to corroborate accomplice testimony.

Necessary corroborative evidence for accomplice testimony can be D's own admissions.

New trial proper in gang murder where the evidence corroborating accomplice's testimony did not tend to implicate D in the crimes.

Although uncorroborated accomplice testimony is not sufficient to support a conviction at trial, it is sufficient to support the finding of probable cause necessary for a grand jury indictment.

Testimony of D's girlfriend, whether or not she was an accomplice as matter of law, was properly admitted as there was ample evidence corroborating it and reasonably supporting its truthfulness.

As record lacked evidence of each element of accomplices' active participation in criminal street gang so as to make their testimony accomplice testimony, no sua sponte duty to instruct jury to view with caution.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, co-Ds perpetrated drive-by, gang-related shootings—brief testimony about one D's statement and DA's passing mention of it, if Aranda-Bruton error, were no more than harmless error.

In gang-related murder, independent evidence, including cell phone records establishing conspirators in continual contact on night of murder, corroborated accomplice testimony by establishing motive & opportunity.