State v. Johnson

According to ORS 136.425(2), the state must corroborate a confession with “some other proof” that “the jury could draw an inference that tends to prove: (1) the injury or harm specified in the crime occurred and (2) that this injury or harm was caused by someone’s criminal activity.” State v. Moreno, 276 Or App 102, 108, 366 P3d 839, rev den, 359 Or 525, cert den, 137 S Ct 342 (2016). 

Defendant appealed convictions of first-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse and assigned error to the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal. Defendant argued that his confessions were not corroborated as required under ORS 136.425(2), and common law corpus delicti. Defendant contended that a single statement by the victim to her mother could not be applied to each count of the indictment, but rather, to the single count that occurred on the day the victim made the statement. The State argued the single statement by the victim corroborated all of the sodomy and sexual abuse counts. According to ORS 136.425(2), the state must corroborate a confession with “some other proof” that “the jury could draw an inference that tends to prove: (1) the injury or harm specified in the crime occurred and (2) that this injury or harm was caused by someone’s criminal activity.” State v. Moreno, 276 Or App 102, 108, 366 P3d 839, rev den, 359 Or 525, cert den, 137 S Ct 342 (2016). The Court held that the State’s reliance on the victim’s single statement was sufficient to corroborate multiple counts of each crime because the threshold for corroboration is very low, and the victim’s statements were enough that a fact finder could have interpreted the victim’s statements to refer to multiple instances. Convictions on Counts 1 through 10 reversed; convictions on Counts 13, 16, and 17 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.