What is the test for corroborative evidence in a murder case?

We agree that the independent corroborative evidence must "do more than raise a conjecture or suspicion of guilt" (People v. Szeto, supra, 29 Cal.3d at p. 27) and it is " 'not sufficient if it requires interpretation and direction to be furnished by the accomplice's testimony to give it value . . . .' " (People v. Falconer, supra, 201 Cal.App.3d at p. 1543.) And, the law is clear that merely connecting the defendant with a gang, or his association with the accomplice and other perpetrators, is not sufficient by itself. (People v. Pedroza, supra, 231 Cal.App.4th at p. 651; People v. Robinson (1964) 61 Cal.2d 373, 400.) But the nonaccomplice evidence in this case raises more than just

Page 26