What is the test for corroboration in a sexual assault case?

Further, even were we to find the court erred in failing to give an accomplice instruction, that error would be harmless in this case. There is no reasonable probability the jury's verdict would have been any different had accomplice instructions been given. A trial court's failure to instruct on the requirement of corroboration is harmless if the record reveals sufficient evidence to corroborate the accomplice's testimony. (People v. Williams (2008) 43 Cal.4th 584, 637-638.) "The corroborating evidence may be entirely circumstantial. . . . The corroborating evidence may be '"slight and entitled to little consideration standing alone."' [Citations.] Only a portion of the accomplice's testimony need be corroborated, and the corroborative evidence need not establish every element of the charged offense. . . . [Citation.] All that is required is that the evidence '"'"connect the defendant with the commission of the crime in such a way as may reasonably satisfy the jury that the

Page 32