Opinion ID: 2317100
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: [¶ 9] When a criminal defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State to determine whether the trier of fact rationally could have found beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the offense charged. State v. Black, 2000 ME 211, ¶ 14, 763 A.2d 109, 113. [¶ 10] Utilizing this standard of review, Erskine's conviction must be affirmed. There was no doubt that Deprez was dead. The evidence was also sufficient to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that Erskine caused her death. She died from injuries that occurred during a period of time when Erskine was with her and during an altercation with him. She was heard asking for help, and Erskine later stated that he had tried to hurt her. He had blood on his hands. [¶ 11] As to the requirement that Erskine caused Deprez's death intentionally, knowingly, or by engaging in conduct that manifests a depraved indifference to the value of human life, Erskine's own statements to the police indicate that he intended to hurt Deprez and that he acted intentionally and knowingly in giving her a bloody nose. He admitted holding his hand over her mouth until she stopped yelling. The evidence was more than sufficient for the jury to infer that the hammer was the instrument that caused Deprez's head injury and to infer that Erskine used the hammer to hit Deprez on the head. From those inferences, the jury was able to draw the additional inference that Erskine acted intentionally or knowingly to cause Deprez's death. The same evidence supports a finding that Erskine acted with depraved indifference in causing Deprez's death. [2]