OUJI-CR 9-30

EVIDENCE - NECESSITY OF CORROBORATION

WHERE COURT DETERMINES WITNESS IS AN ACCOMPLICE

You are instructed that the witness, [Name of Witness], is what is termed in law as an accomplice to the crime of (which the defendant stands charged)/(Specify Crime). For that reason you cannot convict the defendant upon the testimony of [Name of Witness] unless you find that his/her testimony is corroborated as required in these instructions.

Committee Comments

The Court of Criminal Appeals decided in Matthews v. State, 1997 OK CR 3, ¶ 20, 953 P.2d 336, 343, that a defendant was entitled to an instruction requiring corroboration of the testimony of a witness who was an accomplice in a crime other than that for which the defendant was being tried. The test for determining whether a witness is an accomplice is whether the witness and defendant both could be indicted for the same offense. Id.; Carter v. State, 1994 OK CR 49, ¶ 29, 879 P.2d 1234, 1246, cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1172 (1995).

(2000 Supp.)