Jerome Scott, Sr. v. Sylvia Garcia
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Jerome Norman Scott, Sr., appeals the district court’s decision denying his petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Scott contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for first-degree murder. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm.
“[Ejvidenee is sufficient to support a conviction so long as ‘after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Cavazos v. Smith, — U.S. -, -, 132 S.Ct. 2, 6 , 181 L.Ed.2d 311 (2011) (per curiam) (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)). Moreover, on habeas review, we may only overturn a state court decision rejecting a sufficiency of the evidence challenge “if the state court decision was ‘objectively unreasonable.’ ” Id. at 4 (quoting Renico v. Lett, 559 U.S. 766, 773 , 130 S.Ct. 1855 , 176 L.Ed.2d 678 (2010)).
Under California law, first degree murder includes murder perpetrated by any “kind of willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing.” CaLPenal Code § 189. The California courts have found…