DocketNumber: No. C-060358.
Judges: Hendon, Painter, Cunningham
Filed Date: 5/30/2008
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/12/2024
{¶ 1} This case is before us pursuant to our entry granting defendant-appellant Price Moorer's App. R. 26(B) application to reopen his direct appeal. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
{¶ 2} Moorer was convicted of several crimes below. He currently challenges only his conviction for improperly discharging a firearm at or into a habitation, in violation of R.C.
{¶ 3} When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction, we must examine the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would convince the average mind of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.1 "The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt."2
{¶ 4} R.C.
{¶ 5} Reading R.C.
{¶ 6} Since Moorer was convicted of discharging a firearm "at or into" a habitation based upon the state's evidence that he had fired a gun "in" a habitation, there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for a violation of R.C.
{¶ 7} Moorer's second assignment of error, challenging the weight of the evidence, and his third assignment of error, challenging the trial court's sentence on the specifications to the R.C.
{¶ 8} In sum, Moorer's conviction for violating R.C.
Judgment accordingly.
PAINTER, P.J., and CUNNINGHAM, J., concur.