COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED April 26, 2011 A.
John Voelker Acting 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. Deangelo J. Johnson, Defendant-Appellant. |
||||
|
|
|||
APPEAL
from a judgment of the circuit court for
Before Curley, P.J., Fine and Brennan, JJ.
¶1 PER CURIAM. Deangelo J. Johnson appeals from a judgment of conviction entered on a jury’s verdict, on one count of first-degree intentional homicide. He contends there is insufficient evidence to support the verdict. We reject this argument and affirm.
¶2 Johnson was charged in the shooting death of Crystal Butler. On appeal, he contends insufficient evidence supports the verdict because no witness observed any shooting or any altercation between Johnson and Butler; Johnson’s brother, Jacorrey, who originally told police Johnson made incriminating statements, denied the same when he testified; no weapon was recovered and the caliber of the weapon used was common; and Johnson never gave an inculpatory statement to police.
¶3 When we review the sufficiency of evidence supporting a
conviction, we may not substitute our judgment for the jury’s “unless the
evidence, viewed most favorably to the state and conviction, is so lacking in
probative value and force that no trier of fact, acting reasonably, could have
found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” State
v. Poellinger, 153
¶4 The standard of review is the same whether the evidence
presented at trial is direct or circumstantial.
¶5
¶6
¶7 Around 1 p.m., Johnson called his brother, Jacorrey, and
asked to be picked up. Jacorrey obliged,
eventually dropping Johnson off in
¶8 Jacorrey also told police that Johnson admitted shooting
¶9 From the evidence, the jury could more than reasonably
conclude Johnson shot and killed
By the Court.—Judgment affirmed.
This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5. (2009-10).
[1] The
jury was free to determine that Jacorrey’s statements to police were the truth
but his testimony was not. See Nabbefeld
v. State, 83