The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Nava, 108 F.3d 340 (9th Cir. 1997):
Morales argues that the evidence against her was insufficient to support her conviction. "In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we consider whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." United States v. Wiseman, 25 F.3d 862, 865 (9th Cir.1994).
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.