United States v. Robin Martell
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Defendant Robin Martell appeals the district court’s denial, following a jury trial, of his motion for acquittal on the charge of assault with intent to commit murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 113 (a)(1) and 1153(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the judgment of the district court.
Mr. Martell contends that the evidence was not sufficient for a rational fact-finder to conclude that he assaulted his girlfriend with specific intent to kill as required by United States v. Jones, 681 F.2d 610, 611 (9th Cir.1981). In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we must first consider “the evidence presented at trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution,” assuming that the jury resolved any factual conflicts in its favor. United States v. Nevils, 598 F.3d 1158, 1164 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc). We then determine whether the “evidence, so viewed, is adequate to allow ‘any rational trier of fact [to find] the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Id. (alteration in original) (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)).