People v. Jimenez CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 21, 2016G051118California757 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

Evidence Sufficiently Proved Jimenez Exposed His Private Parts Jimenez challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for indecent exposure. The test for sufficiency of the evidence is “whether, 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.” (Jackson v. Virginia (1979) 443 U.S. 307, 318-319; People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576-578 (Johnson).) The reviewing court reviews the whole record and evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment below and determines whether the record contains substantial evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (Johnson, supra, at p. 562; see People v. Sanchez (1995) 12 Cal.4th 1, 32 [standard of review is same where prosecution relies mainly on circumstantial evidence].) The evidence must be of ponderable legal significance, reasonable in nature, credible and of solid value. (People v. Albillar (2010) 51 Cal.4th 47, 60; People v. Bassett (1968) 69 Cal.2d 122, 139 [circumstances reasonably reconcilable…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.