While the defendant willingly paid for the portion of his meal he had consumed, he again refused to pay for the oatmeal, noting that the quantity and quality did not meet his expectations. Ultimately, Huntzinger asked the defendant to follow him to the Whitehall police station so that he could issue the defendant a citation and summons for petty theft. The defendant did so, and was ultimately convicted of theft. Thereafter, the court imposed a fifty dollar fine, plus court costs. Sufficiency and weight of the evidence are distinct legal concepts to which different tests apply.
Sufficiency is synonymous with adequacy.
When reviewing a conviction which is challenged as not supported by sufficient evidence, the evidence must be construed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, and the reviewing court must determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found each of the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. No. 93AP-387, unreported. The test is whether all or some part of the evidence that was admitted in the trial would, if believed, convince the average mind beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of committing the offense charged. A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence attacks whether the prosecution has presented adequate evidence on each element of the offense. Thompkins, supra .