The instruction of which Hill complains is supported by appellate decisions and is virtually identical to the charge on corroboration of a defendant's statement in the Suggested Pattern Jury Instructions, Vol. II: Criminal Cases (4th ed.), § 1.32.70. See Chapman v. State, 275 Ga. 314, 315 (2) ( 565 SE2d 442) (2002); Terrell v. State, 271 Ga. 783, 786 (4) ( 523 SE2d 294) (1999); Ford v. State, 281 Ga. App. 114, 116 (2) ( 635 SE2d 391) (2006); Brown v. State, 198 Ga. App. 352 (1) ( 401 SE2d 568) (1991). The requested instruction supported the defense in that it required that Hill's statement be sufficiently supported by some other evidence so as to justify a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Cit.]" Brown v. State, 198 Ga. App. 352, 353(2) ( 401 S.E.2d 568) (1991). Furthermore, the use of the word "innocence" in the first portion of the instruction, when considered either in isolation or as part of the whole charge, did not shift the burden of proof to the defense.