People v. Zizzo

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting the defendant’s argument that Reyes and cases with similar holdings “establish, as a matter of law, that a recanted prior inconsistent statement cannot support a conviction”
• looking at witness’s two statements in the light most favorable to the State, court can presume, judging from jury’s verdict, which statement jury, who was able to observe witness on the stand, reasonably concluded was truthful and which statement was untruthful
• looking at witness's two statements in the light most favorable to the State, court can presume, judging from jury's verdict, which statement jury, who was able to observe witness on the stand, reasonably concluded was truthful and which statement was untruthful
• a reviewing court may presume the jury’s verdict reflects that it found a witness’s prior inconsistent statement more trustworthy than his trial testimony
• when a defendant is convicted on the basis of a recanted prior inconsistent statement, “the only inquiry” is whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).