California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Mincey, 2 Cal.4th 408, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 822, 827 P.2d 388 (Cal. 1992):
2 It is unclear from defendant's brief whether his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is made in connection with the trial court's denial of the defense motion for judgment of acquittal ( 1118.1), or in connection with the guilt phase in its entirety. The standard applied by the trial court under section 1118.1 in ruling on a motion for judgment of acquittal is the same as the standard applied by an appellate court in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction. (People v. Ainsworth (1988) 45 Cal.3d 984, 1022, 248 Cal.Rptr. 568, 755 P.2d 1017.) The discussion that follows analyzes the sufficiency of the evidence first in the context of whether the evidence presented in the prosecution's case-in-chief was sufficient to establish every element of the offense, and then in the context of whether the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.
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.