Hubbard v. State

91 S.W. 11, 77 Ark. 126, 1905 Ark. LEXIS 168
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided November 18, 1905·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

McCulloch, J.,

(after stating the facts.) The court committed an error in giving instruction No. 7. By it the jury were told that they might' convict the defendant if they were satisfied, beyond a reasonable doubt, by the confession alone, or in connection with all other testimony in the case, that he was guilty of the crime charged. The confession alone is insufficient to sustain a conviction. There must be other proof of the commission of the offense. Kirby’s Digest, § 2385.

It is not essential that the corpus delicti be established by proof entirely independent of the confession, and the instruction to that effect asked by the defendant was properly refused. Meisenheimer v. State, 73 Ark. 407.

The judgment is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hubbard v. State, 91 S.W. 11, 77 Ark. 126, 1905 Ark. LEXIS 168 (Ark. 1905).

91 S.W. 11 (Hubbard v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ezell v. State
229 S.W.2d 32 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1950)
Mouser v. State
219 S.W.2d 611 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1949)
Lind v. State
207 S.W. 47 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1918)
Greenwood v. State
156 S.W. 427 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1913)
Harshaw v. State
127 S.W. 745 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1910)