Opinion ID: 2612223
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: sufficient evidence of computer fraud

Text: Appellant also submits that insufficient evidence was presented to sustain his conviction for computer fraud in the first degree pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-2316(A). [2] The court denied appellant's motion for directed verdict of acquittal on this count. 17 A.R.S. Rules of Criminal Procedure, rule 20(a), provides for a judgment of acquittal prior to verdict only when there is no substantial evidence to warrant a conviction. In reviewing a denial of a defendant's motion for directed verdict, the appellate court must view the facts most strongly in favor of upholding the jury's verdict. State v. Printz, 125 Ariz. 300, 609 P.2d 570 (1980). The record indicates that substantial evidence was presented to support the conviction of computer fraud in the first degree. Bank records document that the victim's Valley National Bank card was used to access that bank's automated teller machine system twenty-eight times and obtain funds therefrom between January 28 and February 3. Testimony by the department manager of Valley National Bank's automated teller machines clearly classifies those machines as computer systems. Photographs were taken of videotapes produced by the bank's teller system. These photographs, admitted into evidence, reveal Jess Gillies and Mike Logan using the teller. It is also clear from the evidence that the appellant intended and did in fact control money from the victim's account by falsely representing himself as Suzanne Rossetti. The trial court did not err in denying the motion for directed verdict.