What is the test for corroborating witness testimony in a sexual assault case?

Preliminarily we point out that "[a]ccomplice testimony must be corroborated to avoid the evil of an accused being convicted solely on the testimony of a coperpetrator who has a motive to place all the blame on the accused. Independent evidence must therefore connect the accused to the commission of the substantive offense...." (People v. Maldonado (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 588, 598.) The corollary rule is that an accomplice's testimony implicating the defendant should be viewed with distrust. The instructions are designed to remind the jury that accomplices, by nature, are riddled with conflicts of interest, that self-interest often trumps loyalty, and that their testimony, as a general rule, is not entitled to the same level of confidence as other witnesses.