328 P.3d 554
Kan. Ct. App.2014Background
- McGill was charged with two counts of aggravated indecent liberties with a child based on extrajudicial confessions.
- District court denied motions to dismiss or in limine seeking to suppress the confessions unless corroborated by corpus delicti evidence.
- Pretrial evidence included testimony from Mills (therapist) and Williams (private investigator) about McGill’s confessions and a self-reported questionnaire.
- Jessica McGill testified at prelim and described McGill’s confessions and caregiving role; corroboration was sought through indirect evidence.
- Bench trial on stipulated facts found McGill guilty; district court’s rulings on the pretrial motions were appealed.
- The court affirmed, holding sufficient corroboration under Kansas corpus delicti doctrine and trustworthiness considerations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corpus delicti requirement satisfied? | McGill argues independent evidence insufficient. | State bears burden to corroborate confession; evidence lacking. | Yes; substantial corroboration exists. |
| Are extrajudicial confessions to non-law enforcement corroborated equally? | Rule applies to all extrajudicial confessions. | Confessions to non-law enforcement require corroboration; reliability is key. | Corroboration applies to all extrajudicial confessions; weight varies by context. |
| Is mere opportunity to commit sufficient corpus delicti evidence? | Opportunity can support corpus delicti. | Opportunity alone is insufficient; must corroborate unique facts. | Opportunity is one factor among corroboration, not sole proof. |
| Application of trustworthiness vs formal corpus delicti rule in Kansas? | Kansas follows Smith/Opper trustworthiness approach. | Majority misapplies rule; needs genuine corroboration for essential facts. | Kansas law requires corroboration to establish trustworthiness and crime; affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. 147 (1954) (corroboration needed; independent evidence or corroborated admissions suffice)
- Opper v. United States, 348 U.S. 84 (1954) (trustworthiness plus corroboration; dual function of evidence)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963) (extrinsic proof can fortify confession without proving crime itself)
- State v. Tillery, 227 Kan. 342 (1980) (uncorroborated confession insufficient; corpus delicti may be proven by corroboration)
- State v. Bradford, 254 Kan. 133 (1993) (prima facie corpus delicti may be established with slight corroboration; underlying evidence need not prove crime itself)
- State v. Pyle, 216 Kan. 423 (1975) (slight prima facie showing suffices for corpus delicti in certain contexts)
- State v. Waddell, 255 Kan. 424 (1994) (discussion of Smith/Opper in Kansas context; confusion clarified later)
- State v. Bell, 121 Kan. 866 (1926) (corroboration of confession by victim’s statements and other evidence)