State v. McNall

The court of appeal's role is not re-weighing evidence to determine guilt because as long as the rational factfinder could conclude the state proved all the elements of the crime, the judicial system gives the jury the responsibility to decide guilt. State v. Miller (A134139), 226 Or App 52, 55 (2009).

Defendant appealed a conviction of arson in the first degree and attempted aggravated theft in the first degree. Defendant assigned error to the court denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal. He argued that the evidence was not sufficient enough to support a conviction of arson, as it could not prove the explosion was done intentionally. Furthermore, he argued specifically argued that (1) the motive evidence was flawed; (2) a different person could have caused the explosion; and (3) evidence did not show it was clear the open ball valve was the explosion source. The State countered the raised arguments with testimony from arson investigators, and expert testimony. The court of appeal's role is not re-weighing evidence to determine guilt because as long as the rational factfinder could conclude the state proved all the elements of the crime, the judicial system gives the jury the responsibility to decide guilt. State v. Miller (A134139), 226 Or App 52, 55 (2009). The Court found in this case that enough evidence was presented to support the conviction. Affirmed.