Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): Although a 1986 D.C. law required the May- or to promulgate rules for providers of residential facilities for District juveniles, see D.C.Code § 7-2103; see generally id. §§ 7-2101 to 7-2108 (codifying the Youth Residential Facilities Licensure Act of 1986), the Mayor failed to develop any such rules for independent living programs prior to the events leading to this case. Absent such rules, no minimum standards were required of District providers generally, and the city’s Youth Services Administration (YSA) had, in the words of its Administrator Gail Turner, “no specific standards” for selecting providers. Tr. 3/17/03 at 32. Viewed in the light most favorable to Tron’s grandmother, Minnie Smith, see, e.g., Ekedahl v. COREStaff, Inc., 183 F.3d 855, 858 (D.C.Cir.1999) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>), the record reveals the following events: In 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that in reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and draw all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in favor of the jurys verdict (B) holding that we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party (C) holding that in reviewing whether there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and draw all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in favor of the jurys verdict (D) holding that we view evidence in light most favorable to defendants requested submission (E) holding that when reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence all evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the government
Output (English): holding that we view evidence in light most favorable to defendants requested submission