Is possession alone sufficient to sustain a conviction for possession of property stolen in a burglary?

"Possession alone of property stolen in a burglary is not of itself sufficient to sustain the possessor's conviction of that burglary. There must be corroborating evidence of acts, conduct, or declarations of the accused tending to show his guilt. When possession is shown, however, the corroborating evidence may be slight...." (People v. Citrino (1956) 46 Cal.2d 284, 288-289, 294 P.2d 32, citations omitted.)