What is the corpus delicti rule and what is the test for relying solely on a defendant's out-of-court statements?

"The corpus delicti rule requires some evidence that a crime occurred, independent of the defendant's own statements." [Citation.] (People v. Ledesma (2006) 39 Cal.4th 641, 721.) The rule, as embodied in CALCRIM No. 359, instructs the jury as to how it should use the defendant's out-of-court statements. The rule requires the jury to take a preliminary step before using the defendant's out-of-court statements in considering whether the prosecution has proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That is, the jury must first determine whether a crime was committed, "i.e., the fact of injury, loss, or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause." (People v. Alvarez (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168.) "This rule is intended to ensure that one will not be falsely convicted, by his or her untested words alone, of a crime that never happened. [Citations.]" (Id. at p. 1169.) In making this determination, a jury cannot rely solely on a defendant's extrajudicial statements; there must also be some independent proof of the crime. "The independent proof may be circumstantial and need not be beyond a reasonable doubt, but is sufficient if it permits an inference of criminal conduct, even if a noncriminal explanation is also plausible. [Citations.] There is no requirement of independent evidence 'of every physical act constituting an element of an offense,' so long as there is some slight or prima facie showing of injury, loss, or harm by a criminal agency. [Citation.] In every case, once the necessary quantum of independent evidence is present, the defendant's extrajudicial statements may then be considered for their full

Page 17

value to strengthen the case on all issues. [Citations.]" (Id. at p. 1171.)