Opinion ID: 1211801
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Direct appeal and post-conviction relief in state court

Text: Newman appealed his convictions to the Michigan Court of Appeals, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his conviction. In an opinion dated July 2, 1999, the Michigan Court of Appeals denied his appeal because [v]iewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution ... a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt all of the elements of the crimes. (J.A. 679.) The Michigan Court of Appeals found that the lack of eyewitnesses was not dispositive, stating that the circumstantial evidence presented was sufficient to support an inference beyond a reasonable doubt that [Newman] either committed the murder himself or aided and abetted in its commission. (J.A. 679.) Accordingly, the court affirmed Newman's convictions and denied his motion for a rehearing. [2] Newman was subsequently denied post-conviction relief in the state trial and appellate courts.