Does the court err in giving instructions to codefendants where one codefendant testified in his own behalf, denied guilt, and incriminated himself?

In People v. Alvarez, supra, 14 Cal.4th 155, the court held the trial court did not err in giving accomplice instructions, where two codefendants each testified in his or her own behalf, denied guilt, and incriminated the other to some extent. The court explained that the testimony of an accomplice who testified against a defendant deserves "'close scrutiny'" because "he has the motive, opportunity, and means to attempt to help himself at the other's expense," and that this rationale "remains true when the accomplice who testified against a defendant is himself a defendant." (Id. at p. 218.)