Martell
United States v. Martell
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Jordan Lee Martell appeals his conviction for first degree murder. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111 (a), 1153. We affirm.
Martell asserts that the evidence was insufficient to allow a rational juror to find him guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Ruiz-Lopez, 234 F.3d 445, 448 (9th Cir.2000); United States v. Free, 841 F.2d 321, 325 (9th Cir.1988). We have reviewed the record and disagree. Specifically, the evidence supports a determination that the victim was alive when Martell and his companions decided to stab the victim to death because he had been beaten so badly that they “couldn’t let him go.” It also supports the determination that there was premeditation and deliberation in that thought process. Moreover, the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that Martell was not too intoxicated to form the necessary mental state.
Martell makes a number of claims of trial error. For the most part, no objection was made at trial. Thus, the plain error standard applies to consideration of those. See United States v. Bracy, 67 F.3d 1421, 1432 (9th Cir.1995); United States v. Alonso, 48 F.3d 1536, 1539 (9th Cir.1995); United States v. Houser,…