What is the test for corroborating the testimony of an accomplice in a sexual assault case?

Penal Code section 1111 states, in relevant part, "[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; . . ." "To corroborate the testimony of an accomplice, the prosecution must present 'independent evidence,' that is, evidence that 'tends to connect the defendant with the crime charged' without aid or assistance from the accomplice's testimony. [Citation.] Corroborating evidence is sufficient if it tends to implicate the defendant and thus relates to some act or fact that is an element of the crime. [Citations.] ' "[T]he corroborative evidence may be slight and entitled to little consideration when standing alone." [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Avila (2006) 38 Cal.4th 491, 562-563.)

"Moreover, ' "only a portion . . . of the accomplice's testimony need be corroborated" ' [citation] and it is ' "not necessary that the corroborative evidence . . . establish every element of the offense charged." [Citations.]' [Citation.] It is only required that the evidence ' " 'tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime in such a way as may reasonably satisfy the jury that the [accomplice] is telling the truth.' " ' [Citation.]" (People v. Miranda (1987) 44 Cal.3d 57, 100.)

Page 12