Opinion ID: 883138
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 26

Heading: Whether the District Court erred when it denied Moore's motion for a judgment of acquittal alleging there was insufficient evidence to convict him of deliberate homicide?

Text: Moore moved for a judgment of acquittal alleging that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of deliberate homicide. Moore advances three arguments to support his motion: (1) the State failed to prove that Moore purposely or knowingly caused Brisbin's death; (2) the evidence failed the sufficiency analysis for circumstantial evidence; and (3) the only evidence which proves Brisbin's death is the piece of brain tissue which was found in Moore's camper, and the State did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the brain tissue was human. The decision whether to direct a verdict of acquittal lies within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of that discretion. The trial court should grant a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal only when there is no evidence to support a guilty verdict. State v. Bromgard (1993), 261 Mont. 291, 293, 862 P.2d 1140, 1141. The standard of review for a judgment of acquittal is 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. State v. Mergenthaler (1994), 263 Mont. 198, 203, 868 P.2d 560, 562. We address each of Moore's arguments in turn.