¶1(dissenting.) The evidence of corroboration of the accomplice is dependent upon vague threats made from four to eight months prior to the fire that the defendant would burn the gin, and some circumstances tending to prove that the fire might have been of incendiary origin. Where the corpus delicti is so insufficiently proved (other than by the accomplice), and the threats were so remote in time from the fire, we do not feel that the statute requiring corroboration is sufficiently met.
84 Ark. 606
Larimore v. State
Decided December 9, 1907
Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1907-12-09
The demurrer should have been sustained. Absence is necessary to constitute one an accessory before the fact. 41 Ark. 173; Kirby’s Digest, § 1560; 1 Wharton, Am. Crim. Law, § 134; 21 Ark. 212. Whatever is necessary to constitute the crime must be alleged. 37 Ark. 274; Kirby’s Digest, § 2227; 41 Ark. 173; 58 Ark. 390; 77 Ark. 321. The evidence of corroboration was entirely insufficient. Corroboration is not sufficient which merely shows that the offense was committed.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
affirmed · Decided 1907-12-09
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 1988
5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →