Alvarez

To convict an accused of a criminal offense, the prosecution must prove that (1) a crime actually occurred, and (2) the accused was the *1165 perpetrator. Though no statute or constitutional principle requires it, California, like most American jurisdictions, has historically adhered to the rule that the first of these components—the corpus delicti or body of the crime— cannot be proved by exclusive reliance on the defendant’s extrajudicial statements.

In practice, the corpus delicti rule operates in several ways. The defendant may object to the admission of his extrajudicial statements on grounds that independent proof of the corpus delicti is lacking. Whenever such statements form part of the prosecution’s case, the jury must be instructed that conviction requires some additional proof the crime occurred. On appeal, a defendant may make a direct claim that there was insufficient evidence, aside from his statements, of the corpus delicti.

In June 1982 the voters, by adopting Proposition 8, added section 28, subdivision (d) (section 28(d)), the “Right to Truth-in-Evidence” provision, to article I of the California Constitution. This section provides that except under…