in the light most favorable to the State, even if contradicted, and indulge in every legitimate inference that may be fairly and reasonably deduced from this evidence. State v. Robinson, 288 N.W.2d 337, 340 (Iowa 1980); State v. Cuevas, 281 N.W.2d 627, 629 (Iowa 1979). Corroborative evidence may be direct or circumstantial. State v. Vesey, 241 N.W.2d 888, 890 (Iowa 1976). It “need not be strong and need not be entirely inconsistent with innocence.” Dickerson, 313 N.W.2d at 529. It must, however, support some material part of the accomplice’s testimony and tend to connect the accused to the commission of the crime. Brown, 397 N.W.2d at 695; Vesey, 241 N.W.2d at 890. We now consider ling Bugely’s motion for judgment of acquittal on the Ripp burglary. See Dickerson, 313 N.W.2d at 530 (<HOLDING>). C. Twin Anchors burglaries. The issue of
holding trial court properly overruled defendants motion for judgment of acquittal where corroborating evidence existed holding remedy for lack of sufficient corroborating evidence is acquittal holding that there is no need for a formal motion for a judgment of acquittal in a bench trial because the plea of not guilty asks the court for a judgment of acquittal holding that trial court erred in denying motion for judgment of acquittal when state failed to prove venue holding the trial court properly denied defendants motion for judgment of acquittal although defendant offered evidence as to how his fingerprints were placed on a candy box found at the scene of the crime