Preview:

CORRECTED OPINION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 102,558 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. JOSE A. PORTILLO, Appellant.

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. The standard of review for a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case is whether, after review of all the evidence, examined in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the appellate court is convinced that a rational factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the function of the jury, not an appellate court, to weigh the evidence and to determine the credibility of witnesses. Those standards are not altered simply because the victim of an alleged rape has made conflicting statements as to whether the defendant effected penetration.

2. Under the facts of this case, a videotape of an 11-year-old child's oral statement that met the requirements of K.S.A. 22-3433 was not rendered inadmissible because it was cumulative to other testimony.

3. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and

Download State v. Portillo (CORRECTED May 2, 2012)..pdf

Kansas Law