State v. OFODRINWA, 241 Or. App. 214

Defendant, 21, dated a 16-year-old girl, C., in a relationship described as ongoing and physically demonstrative.
During a police interview, defendant confessed to having sexual intercourse with C. on the morning of December 24, 2007; he knew C. was under 18.
An empty condom wrapper was found in defendant’s pants pocket during the arrest, and another wrapper was found in the apartment.
The State charged four counts of second-degree sexual abuse based on four separate acts of intercourse with C. between 2006 and 2007.
The trial court granted judgment of acquittal as to Counts 2–4, but denied it for Count 1, relying on corroborating evidence other than the confession for Count 1.
On appeal, the court addresses whether there was legally sufficient corroboration of the confession to convict on Count 1 under ORS 136.425(1) (2007).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the confession to intercourse on Dec. 24, 2007 could be corroborated independent of the confession itself.	State argues independent corroboration exists via the condom wrapper and ongoing relationship.	Ofodorinwa contends corroboration is insufficient and primarily relies on the confession.	Yes; legally sufficient corroboration existed.

State v. Lerch, 296 Or. 377 (1984) (corroboration standard for corpus delicti under Lerch)
State v. Fry, 42 P.3d 369 (2002) (evidence of sexual intercourse necessary to corroborate confession)
State v. Campbell, 178 P.3d 337 (2008) (insufficient corroboration where none of the evidence tended to show the victim was subjected to the conduct)
State v. Delp, 178 P.3d 259 (2008) (similar insufficiency where corroboration failed to show harm/injury occurred)
State v. Simons, 167 P.3d 476 (2008) (corroboration issues in abuse cases against capable victims)
State v. Muzzy, 79 P.3d 324 (2003) (acknowledges Lerch/Fry complexities in corroboration)
State v. Stamper, 106 P.3d 172 (2005) (briefly cited regarding standards of proof)