EVIDENCE - CORROBORATION OF
TESTIMONY IN RAPE PROSECUTION
[NO INSTRUCTION SHOULD BE GIVEN]
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals held as follows in Gilmore v. State, 1993 OK CR 27, ¶ 11, 855 P.2d 143, 144: "Corroboration is necessary for admission of a rape victim's testimony only where the testimony is so unsubstantial and incredible as to be unworthy of belief." Thus, testimony of a rape victim should not be admitted into evidence without corroboration if it is unworthy of belief. On the other hand, if the testimony is believable or is corroborated, then an instruction concerning corroboration is unnecessary. Ray v. State, 1988 OK CR 199, ¶ 8, 762 P.2d 274, 277 (no error for trial court to refuse instruction on corroboration where Court of Criminal Appeals determined that testimony was corroborated and not inconsistent, uncertain, or contradictory). In other words, the trial court, rather than the jury, has the responsibility for determining whether the testimony of a rape victim is so unworthy of belief as to require corroboration.