State v. Robert H.

Syllabus

Convicted of two counts of the crime of risk of injury to a child arising out of two separate acts of masturbation in the presence of the minor victim, and judgment revoking his probation, the defendant appealed. The defen- dant claimed that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction as to one of the counts of risk of injury because the only evidence of the second incident was two statements that he made to the police, which were admitted without objection at trial. The victim had testified at trial concerning only one such incident. The defendant claimed that the common-law corpus delicti rule, or corroboration rule, precluded his confession from being used as the only evidence of the second incident because there was no substantial independent evidence tending to establish the trustworthiness of that confession. This court affirmed the conviction. The defendant, on the granting of certification, appealed to our Supreme Court, which reversed the judgment of this court and remanded the case to this court with direction to consider fully the merits of the defendant's corpus delicti claim in light of its decision in State v. Leniart (333 Conn. 88). Held that the defendant could not prevail on his corpus delicti claim that his confession constituted insufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that he had masturbated in the presence of the victim on more than one occasion, as there was substantial evidence to corroborate the defendant's written statement, which was against his penal interest, that he had masturbated at least twice in the presence of the victim, including that the defendant voluntarily went to the police and agreed in writing to a videotaped interview with officers and to waive his constitutional rights when he gave a signed, written statement to the police, the defendant's statement closely paralleled the victim's testimony regarding the defendant's masturbation in her bedroom, there were seven stains containing the defendant's DNA on th