People v. Ford CA6

DISCUSSION

Defendant asserts there was not sufficient evidence presented to the jury to support the conviction for annoying or molesting a child under the age of 14. In addition, defendant argues the court erred by giving the jury instruction for motive as stated in CALCRIM No. 370. Sufficiency of the Evidence On appeal, defendant argues the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of violating section 647.6, subdivision (c)(2). He claims that he did not engage in conduct that would without hesitation disturb or irritate a normal person. (CALCRIM No. 1122; see People v. Carskaddon (1957) 49 Cal.2d 423, 426 (Carksaddon).) In determining whether the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction, we “review ‘the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment’ and decide ‘whether it discloses substantial evidence . . . such that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.’ (People v. Johnson [1980] 26 Cal.3d 557, 578.) Under this standard, the court does not ‘ “ask itself whether it believes that the evidence at the trial established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” [Citation.] Instead, the relevant question is whether,…