California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Tam Trong Nguyen, G045626 (Cal. App. 2013):
Second, defendant's argument is premised on viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to him. "Perhaps the most fundamental rule of appellate law is that the judgment challenged on appeal is presumed correct, and it is the appellant's burden to affirmatively demonstrate error. [Citation.]" (People v. Sanghera (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1567, 1573.) Consequently, to prevail on an insufficiency-of-the-evidence claim, an appellant "must affirmatively demonstrate that the evidence is insufficient." (Ibid.) An appellant "does not show the evidence is insufficient by citing only his own evidence, or by arguing about what evidence is not in the record, or by portraying the evidence that is in the record in the light most favorable to himself." (Ibid.)
Third, the evidence supports the jury's street terrorism verdict. "[T]he elements of the gang offense are (1) active participation in a criminal street gang, in the sense of participation that is more than nominal or passive; (2) knowledge that the gang's members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity; and (3) the willful promotion, furtherance, or assistance in any felonious criminal conduct by members of that gang. [Citation.]" (People v. Albillar (2010) 51 Cal.4th 47, 56.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.