1. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS Supreme Court of Iowa 695 N.W.2d 23 (2005) Case Brief

2. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS PURPOSE: Williams illustrates the substantial evidence rule applied to a criminal case.

3. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS CAUSE OF ACTION: Assault.

4. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS FACTS: Williams allegedly assaulted his wife Raegen. The evidence: A tape of a 911 call made by Raegen, her oral and written statements to police the morning of the alleged assault, and a red mark on her neck. At trial, Raegen recanted and denied that Williams had assaulted her. The jury found Williams guilty and the court entered a judgment of guilty, to which Williams moved for a judgment of acquittal.

5. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS ISSUE: Whether the trial court was correct in denying Williams’ motion for judgment of acquittal.

6. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS HOLDING: Yes. The trial court did not err in denying Williams’ motion for judgment of acquittal.

7. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE v. WILLIAMS REASONING: Substantial evidence test: Evidence is substantial if it would convince a rational fact finder that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Substantial evidence must do more than raise suspicion or speculation. We consider all record evidence not just the evidence supporting guilt when we make sufficiency-of-the-evidence determinations. However, in making such determinations, we also view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State.