People v. Martin CA5

DISCUSSION

I. SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

Martin contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the jury’s attempted murder and arson verdicts.3 He focuses on two elements common to both convictions: Was the evidence sufficient to show that the fire was deliberately set, not an accident, and that Martin was the person who set it? It was both. A. The Facts Because Martin raises a sufficiency of the evidence claim, we lay out the underlying facts in some detail, doing so as we must in the light most favorable to the judgment. (People v. Abilez (2007) 41 Cal.4th 472, 504.) Additional facts relevant to the jury instruction issue Martin also raises are separately set forth below. i. The Backdrop Martin and S.M. started dating in February 2018 and rather quickly had two daughters, M.M.1 and M.M.2.4 The couple separated soon after M.M.2 was born in March 2020 because S.M. said she “had to put a stop to” Martin’s repeatedly stealing from her. By February 7, 2021, the date of the current offenses, M.M.2 was “about to turn a year [old], and [M.M.1] would have been just two.” In the meantime, S.M. had obtained custody of the girls and Martin had no visitation rights. After they…