The trial court did not err when, in a prosecution for first degree murder and robbery, the jury was given a jury instruction pursuant to CALJIC No. 2.15 concerning corroboration. CALJIC 2.15, which has withstood numerous challenges, evolved from cases holding that proof of possession of stolen property is insufficient by itself to support a guilty verdict as to a theft-related offense, and corroboration, however slight, is required. Although CALJIC 2.15 should be restricted to theft and theft-related crimes, no prejudicial error was shown by the its reference to murder in this case. The jury was adequately instructed on the elements of murder. Further, Barker made multiple admissions of his guilt, and there was sufficient evidence from which to conclude that the murder took place during the course of a robbery. There was no reasonable likelihood that the jury misinterpreted the law in a way potentially unfavorable to the defense and the error was therefore harmless.