Concerning accomplice testimony, what is required?

• A. Accomplice testimony is sufficient for conviction
• B. Corroboration is required to convict based on accomplice testimony
• C. Accomplices cannot testify
• D. Corroboration is optional

Answer: (B)

Accomplice testimony cannot be the sole basis for a conviction because such a witness has a strong motive to shift blame or minimize their own involvement. To counter this reliability issue, the law requires independent corroboration: there must be additional evidence apart from the accomplice’s account that tends to connect the defendant to the crime. The corroboration need not prove guilt by itself, but it must support at least one material aspect of the accomplice’s story and come from a source other than the accomplice.

This safeguard exists because the testimony of a participant in the crime is inherently suspect, and independent proof helps assure the jury that the defendant was indeed involved. If no corroborating evidence is present, the conviction should not be sustained.