State v. ODEMS

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that in reviewing a ruling on a directed verdict motion, this court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State
• holding that on appeal from the denial of a directed verdict motion, the appellate court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State
• noting that evaluation of circumstantial evidence requires the connection of collateral facts in order to reach a conclusion, a process not required when evaluating direct evidence
• noting that in Bostick, “the State never introduced a motive ... into evidence”
• stating in reviewing the denial of a directed verdict motion, the appellate court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State
• providing “when the State fails to produce substantial circumstantial evidence that the defendant committed a particular crime, the defendant is entitled to a directed verdict”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).