Opinion ID: 2609769
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: Appellant, in his final issue, questions the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his second degree murder conviction. In reviewing sufficiency of the evidence claims we examine the evidence to determine whether all of the evidence presented is adequate to support a reasonable inference of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to be drawn by the finder of fact, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state.    We do not substitute our judgment for that of the jury in applying this rule, and our only duty is to determine if a quorum of reasonable and rational individuals would, or even could, have come to the same result the jury actually did. Taul v. State, 862 P.2d 649, 657 (Wyo.1993) (citations omitted) ( quoting Saldana v. State, 846 P.2d 604, 619 (Wyo.1993)). In order to sustain appellant's conviction for second degree murder, the evidence must be sufficient to show that he killed Adam purposely and maliciously without premeditation. W.S. 6-2-104. It is undisputed that Adam was beaten to death. There is evidence from eyewitnesses and from the autopsy of the extensive injuries that Adam suffered. There was evidence of the physical and emotional abuse that permeated appellant's relationship with Adam. The appellant had ample time and access to Adam on the night of his death. While this evidence is circumstantial, it was sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that appellant was guilty of second degree murder in the beating death of Adam Franklin.