How does the Court of Appeal review the sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Dokins, 194 Cal.Rptr.3d 626, 241 Cal.App.4th 1179 (Cal. App. 2015):

When the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction is challenged on appeal, we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it contains evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid value from which a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation.] Conflicts and even testimony which is subject to justifiable suspicion do not justify the reversal of a judgment, for it is the exclusive province of the trial judge or jury to determine the credibility of a witness and the truth or falsity of the facts upon which a determination depends. [Citation.] Unless it describes facts or events that are physically impossible or inherently improbable, the testimony of a single witness is sufficient to support a conviction. (People v. Elliott (2012) 53 Cal.4th 535, 585, 137 Cal.Rptr.3d 59, 269 P.3d 494.) So, if the verdict is supported by substantial evidence, we must accord due

[241 Cal.App.4th 1196]

deference to the trier of fact and not substitute our evaluation of a witness's credibility for that of the fact finder. (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 23, 864 P.2d 103.)

Other Questions


When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the conviction of a convicted rapist, does the court have to review the evidence in the context of section 1118.1? (California, United States of America)
In reviewing the sufficiency of evidence to support the conviction, how does the court review the evidence? (California, United States of America)
When reviewing for the sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction, how does the court review the evidence? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the conviction, how does the court review the evidence? (California, United States of America)
How does the Court of Appeal review the sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant argues on appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support their conviction, how does the court review the evidence? (California, United States of America)
When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, how does the Court of Appeal review the whole record? (California, United States of America)
How does the Court of Appeal review the sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction? (California, United States of America)
When the evidence is sufficient to sustain some but not all alleged damages, when the evidence does not support all of the damages, will the court reduce the judgment to the amount supported by the evidence? (California, United States of America)
How does the Court of Appeal review the sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.