Opinion ID: 793606
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: 36 In reviewing a sufficiency-of-the-evidence claim, we consider whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Copeland, 321 F.3d 582, 600 (6th Cir.2003) (quotation marks omitted). We are bound to make all reasonable inferences and credibility choices in support of the jury's verdict. United States v. Hughes, 895 F.2d 1135, 1140 (6th Cir.1990). 37 Johnson and Stone were charged with and convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), which provides as follows: 38 It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. 39 Id. (Emphasis added.) They were also charged with and convicted of conspiring to violate the above-quoted statute, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d). The two arguments that Johnson and Stone raise regarding the sufficiency of the evidence are (1) whether there was sufficient evidence of an enterprise, and (2) whether there was sufficient evidence that the enterprise was engaged in or affected interstate commerce. 40