State of Utah v. Brandon Lee Sandoval, 2010 UT App. 3, (Utah Court of Appeals, January 14, 2010).
Brandon Lee Sandoval was convicted of aggravated burglary and now appeals based on a jury instruction given by the trial court that stated that conviction can be based on the uncorroborated testimony of a single eyewitness. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction finding that such an instruction did not give additional credibility to any one witness at trial. “The instruction merely told the jury that, if it chose to believe the eyewitness, it could convict Sandoval without concern that the eyewitness testimony was not corroborated.”
Full Decision available at http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/mds/sandoval011410.pdf
Posts
1 comment:
The trial court also instructed
"You are entitled to believe one witness as against many or many as against one"
That was sufficient. It did not need to instruct further on testimony.
Perhaps the the proper instruction would have been, "The jury may acquit or convict based on the uncorroborated testimony of any witness." (I guess I would hope that pretrial evidentiary rulings would filter any uncorroborated confessions).
Post a Comment