Judgment affirmed.
The defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We disagree. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must, the inquiry is whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Contes,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.