Is sufficient evidence to support a conviction if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt?

MultiRegion, United States of America

The following excerpt is from United States v. Eglash, 813 F.3d 882 (9th Cir. 2016):

"There is sufficient evidence to support a conviction if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt." United States v. Gonzalez, 528 F.3d 1207, 1211 (9th Cir.2008). "When a claim of sufficiency of the evidence is preserved by making a motion for acquittal at the close of evidence, this court reviews the district court's denial of the motion de novo." Id.

Other Questions


What is sufficient to support a conviction if any rational juror could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing that a rational trier of fact could not have found the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for determining that a rational trier of fact could not have found the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for a jury to determine whether a trier of fact could have found the essential elements of a crime beyond reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Is a defendant entitled to a judgment of acquittal if no rational trier of fact found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
If there is an error in the finding that a defendant is not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on the basis of reasonable doubt, is that error harmless beyond reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Can a rational trier of fact find that the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Can a jury reasonably have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Can a rational jury find that the essential elements of the crime were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Are there any cases where the Supreme Court has found that criminal convictions for common law crimes against individuals who have not been convicted of criminal convictions are sufficient grounds for criminal convictions? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.