COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 18, 2007 Clerk of Court of Appeals |
|
NOTICE |
|
|
This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See Wis. Stat. § 808.10 and Rule 809.62. |
|
Appeal No. |
|
|||
STATE OF |
IN COURT OF APPEALS |
|||
|
DISTRICT I |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
State of Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Defendant-Appellant. |
||||
|
|
|||
APPEAL
from a judgment of the circuit court for
Before Wedemeyer, Fine and Kessler, JJ.
¶1 FINE, J.
I.
¶2
¶3
¶4 According to
¶5 Taylor testified that, besides Jackson, the only people in
the employee area that evening were his mother, his daughter, and his daughter’s
mother, but that none of them went into the back office that night.
¶6 As we have seen, the jury found
There was proof that there was a gun at the restaurant. Based on the design of the gun or, rather, the restaurant, the doors being locked leading into the office area and leading out from the office area all prevented anyone from entering under the circumstances of this particular case.
The fact that the security board, I think it was that I mentioned, was off the door in the back indicates that the defendant left through that back area, and no one could enter from the outside of the back door because it couldn’t be opened from there, and the door was locked leading into the office when Mr. Taylor came back.
The
defendant was the only person in the store when he left, and he was not there
when
For those reasons the Court will deny the motion … for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
II.
¶7
¶8 A finding of guilt may rest on circumstantial evidence. State v. Poellinger, 153
[A]n appellate court may not reverse a conviction unless the evidence, viewed most favorably to the state and the conviction, is so insufficient in probative value and force that it can be said as a matter of law that no trier of fact, acting reasonably, could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ibid. Accordingly, we must look at the “evidence in a light most favorable to the jury’s verdict.” See State v. Bannister, 2007 WI 86, ¶22, ___ Wis. 2d ___, ___, 734 N.W.2d 892, 897.
¶9 There was ample circumstantial evidence to support
·
· The gun was in a locked area of the restaurant to which only Taylor and Jackson had access.
·
·
When
·
A reasonable
jury could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that
By the Court.—Judgment affirmed.
Publication in the official reports is not recommended.
[1]
Although