California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Bunyard, 249 Cal.Rptr. 71, 45 Cal.3d 1189, 756 P.2d 795 (Cal. 1988):
Section 1111 provides, in pertinent part, that "a conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless it be corroborated by such other evidence as shall tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense." In People v. Perry (1972) 7 Cal.3d 756 at page 769, 103 Cal.Rptr. 161, 499 P.2d 129, this court reviewed the standard by which the sufficiency of corroborating evidence is to be measured: "To corroborate the testimony of an accomplice, the prosecution must produce independent evidence which, without aid or assistance from the testimony of the accomplice, tends to connect the defendant with the crime charged. [Citation omitted.] 'The evidence need not corroborate the accomplice as to every fact to which he testifies but is sufficient if it does not require interpretation and direction from the testimony of the accomplice yet tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense in such a way as reasonably may satisfy a jury that the accomplice is telling the truth; it must tend to implicate the defendant and therefore must relate to some act or fact which is an element of the crime but it is not necessary that the corroborative evidence be sufficient in itself to establish every element of the offense charged.' [Citations omitted.] ... '[T]he corroborative evidence may be slight and entitled to little consideration when standing alone.' [Citations omitted.]" (Accord, People v. Szeto (1981) 29 Cal.3d 20, 27, 171 Cal.Rptr. 652, 623 P.2d 213.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.