Opinion ID: 48990
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Garcia-Esparza's Claim of Insufficiency of the Evidence

Text: 38 Garcia-Esparza claims that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction on any of Counts One, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, Twenty, Thirty, and Thirty-Two.
39 In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, we ordinarily review the jury's verdict by determining whether a rational juror could have found the elements of the offense proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 1 In so doing, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, with all reasonable inferences and credibility choices made in support of the jury verdict. 2 When a defendant fails to move for a judgment of acquittal and thereby fails to preserve the issue for appeal, however, we review to determine only whether the conviction amounts to a manifest miscarriage of justice. 3 Under this standard, we will reverse a conviction only if the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt. 4
40 As Garcia-Esparza failed to move for a judgment of acquittal in the district court, we review for manifest miscarriage of justice. Even a cursory review of the record illustrates that it is not devoid of evidence of guilt. We affirm each of Garcia-Esparza's convictions.