Criminal Procedure - Evidence - Accomplice Testimony - Testimony of Accessory after the Fact Need Not Be Corroborated
![handle is hein.journals/stmlj8 and id is 391 raw text is: CASE NOTES
that of the welfare recipient whom the Court favored with a pretermination
hearing in Goldberg.
The holding in Eldridge is troubling. While not the first major case
since Goldberg to deny a predeprivation hearing,54 the decision in Eldridge
appears to presage a significant departure from the Court's recent concern
with the rights of individuals in social welfare cases. The decision to deny
a hearing to disability benefits recipients invites new challenges to the con-
stitutionality of a summary termination of disability benefits and to the
Court's sense of procedural due process.
William R. Crow, Jr.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE--Evidence-Accomplice Testimony-
Testimony of Accessory After the Fact
Need Not Be Corroborated
Easter v. State,
536 S.W.2d 223 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976).
Wilmer Easter was convicted of murdering his ten month old daughter. At
trial, the State relied heavily on his wife's uncorroborated testimony, and the
court overruled his requested instruction'to submit to the jury the issue of
whether his wife, who had temporarily concealed the crime, was an accom-
plice witness. Easter contended on appeal that the court erred in refusing
his instruction, urging that his wife was an accessory, and therefore an
accomplice witness, which necessitated corroboration of her testimony.
Held-Affirmed. An accessory is not an accomplice witness, and his
uncorroborated testimony alone may support another's conviction.'
The statutory requirement of corroboration of an accomplice witness'
testimony has long been in effect in Texas.2 Although the Court of
Criminal Appeals at an early date adopted a broad definition of the term
54. Mitchell v. W.T. Grant Co., 416 U.S. 600, 611 (1974) (pretermination hearing
held unnecessary where full and immediate posttermination hearing provided).
1. Easter v. State, 536 S.W.2d 223, 229 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976).
2. Tex. Code Crim. P. art. 718 (1925); Tex. Code Crim. P. art. 781 (1895). The
current statute, TEx. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 38.14 (1965), provides: A convic-
tion cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other
evidence tending to connect the defendant with the offense committed; and the corrobo-
ration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense.
-1976]](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/stmlj8&div=38&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Criminal Procedure - Evidence - Accomplice Testimony - Testimony of Accessory after the Fact Need Not Be Corroborated
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most