State v. Nickles

“[A] confession alone is not sufficient to warrant the conviction of the defendant without some other proof that the crime has been committed.” ORS 136.425(2); see, e.g., State v. Hauskins, 251 Or App 34, 40, 281 P3d 669 (2012).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction of unlawful possession of a destructive device, arising from an incident where Defendant severely injured himself when the device detonated in his hand. After being taken to the hospital, Defendant was questioned by police regarding the circumstances that led to his injury and was subsequently convicted based upon the confession given. On appeal, Defendant argued that the State failed to adequately corroborate his confession and, therefore, his confession was not sufficient to warrant conviction without further evidence. In response, the State argued that the extent of Defendant’s injuries and the investigating officer’s testimony both corroborated Defendant’s confession. “[A] confession alone is not sufficient to warrant the conviction of the defendant without some other proof that the crime has been committed.” ORS 136.425(2); see, e.g., State v. Hauskins, 251 Or App 34, 40, 281 P3d 669 (2012). The Court found that the State failed to corroborate the confession with further evidence that a crime had occurred as there was no evidence independent of Defendant’s conviction that tended to show that the injuries of Defendant were caused by unlawful possession of a destructive device. Reversed.