Email or Call (215) 564-0644

    Pennsylvania Criminal Appeals Law – Sufficiency of the Evidence (Rule 606)

    Sufficiency of the Evidence – Were All Elements of the Crime Proven Beyond a Reasonable Doubt?

    In a Pennsylvania criminal case, such as a murder or robbery case, the evidence will be sufficient to support a verdict when the evidence establishes each element of the crimes, beyond a reasonable doubt. If the evidence is contrary to facts, human experience or the laws of nature, it is insufficient. Get more info, visit the Pennsylvania Criminal Appeals & PCRA Law Library.

    When a Sufficiency of the Evidence Claim is Raised

    Under Rule 606 of Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, a defendant may raise the claim at practically any time during the trial or sentencing. It may also be raised for the first time on appeal. However, if a sufficiency of the evidence claim is raised for the first time on appeal, a defendant must, in his Rule 1925(b) statement, specify the basis of the claim. Specifically, the defendant must identify the elements of the crime(s) upon which the evidence was insufficient. This allows the appellate court to analyze the elements and evidence. PA appeals courts have ruled that failure to specify the unproven elements of the crime(s) per a Rule 1925(b) statement constitutes waiver of the sufficiency issue. Also, it’s important to note that boilerplate language will not cut it.

    Rule 606. Challenges to Sufficiency of Evidence.

    (A) A defendant may challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction of one or more of the offenses charged in one or more of the following ways:

    (1) a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the Commonwealth’s case-in-chief;

    (2) a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence;

    (3) a motion for judgment of acquittal filed within 10 days after the jury has been discharged without agreeing upon a verdict;

    (4) a motion for judgment of acquittal made orally immediately after verdict;

    (5) a motion for judgment of acquittal made orally before sentencing pursuant to Rule 704(B);

    (6) a motion for judgment of acquittal made after sentence is imposed pursuant to Rule 720 (B); or

    (7) a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence made on appeal.

    (B) A motion for judgment of acquittal shall not constitute an admission of any facts or inferences except for the purpose of deciding the motion. If the motion is made at the close of the Commonwealth’s evidence and is not granted, the defendant may present evidence without having reserved the right to do so, and the case shall otherwise proceed as if the motion had not been made.

    (C) If a defendant moves for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence, the court may reserve decision until after the jury returns a guilty verdict or after the jury is discharged without agreeing upon a verdict.

    Standard of Review

    When reviewing a sufficiency claim in a criminal case, the appellate court will view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict winner, giving the prosecution the benefit of all reasonable inferences to be drawn from the evidence. The court will then determine whether the evidence was sufficient to allow the jury to find that the prosecution established all the elements of the crime(s) beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Top Rated Criminal Lawyer in Philadelphia – Free Consultations (215) 564-0644

    David Nenner is a Super Lawyers rated criminal lawyer who handles appeals throughout the Southeastern Pennsylvania area. Criminal appeals are handled in Philadelphia, Montgomery, Delaware, Bucks, Chester and Central PA.  Call for a free consultation.

    Disclaimer: This website does not create any attorney-client relationship or provide legal advice. Our lawyers provide legal advice only after accepting a case. It is imperative that any action taken is done on advice of counsel. Read full disclaimer below.



    David S. Nenner

    "Top Rated Criminal Defense Lawyer"

    MURDER, Att. Murder CHARGES – Negotiated Significantly Lower prison sentence (Feb. 2022, PHILA)

    Mr. Anderson faced murder and attempted murder charges after an incident in Northeast Philadelphia involving the shooting death of Anderson’s sister’s boyfriend and the boyfriend’s roommate who was shot 5 times and survived. The decedent had previously beaten the...


    The Commonwealth alleged that Mr. Shelton shot and seriously injured a male in a bar in North Philadelphia called Circles. There was video of the shooting which happened outside the bar. However, Mr. Nenner presented witnesses who testified that the person in the bar...


    Mr. Nenner's client was charged with multiple crimes (murder, conspiracy, aggravated assault, robbery, etc.) after a shooting death occurred at a gambling house in North Philadelphia. At trial, Mr. Nenner successfully presented a self-defense argument and convinced...


    Mr. Nenner’s client was charged with murder and gun charges in Philadelphia. The client was accused of shooting and killing another male on Arch Street near the 5600 block of Ithan Street in Philadelphia. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty after deliberating...

    Drug Possession Case – Motion to Suppress Granted

    Mr. Nenner presented evidence that to show that the traffic stop was a pretextual stop. The officer had no reason to pull the car over. The judge agreed and suppressed the evidence. As a result, the prosecution withdrew the charges.

    Sentencing for 1st Degree Murder in PA

    In this article below we discuss sentencing for 1st degree murder cases in Pennsylvania. In later articles, we will discuss sentencing for 2nd and 3rd degree murder cases. If you or a loved one is facing murder charges in Philadelphia or the surrounding counties,...

    Philadelphia Criminal Trials – Evidence Pointing to Another Perpetrator in Drug Possession or Drug Manufacture Cases

    In criminal trials in Philadelphia, one pretty common defense tactic is pointing the finger at another person at trial. This can raise enough doubt to result in a not guilty verdict by the judge or jury that the defendant was not the perpetrator of the crime. Here’s...

    Philadelphia Murder & Gun Possession Cases Increasing in 2021 – A Look at Common Charges & Defenses

    A look at PA criminal law for Murder (1st, 2nd, 3rd Degree), Aggravated Assault, Robbery, Possession of a Firearm, Carrying a Firearm Without a License, Carrying a Firearm in Philadelphia (misdemeanor).

    Pennsylvania Murder Charges, Deceased Person’s Statements Used to Prove Guilt

    Defense Trial Strategies – Excluding Statements That Accuse the Defendant Prosecutors often look to a deceased individual’s statements made prior to a murder to show that the defendant is guilty. These statements may point to a history of violence between the deceased...

    Pennsylvania (State) Drug Charges, Dog Sniffs & Constitutional Law

    Federal and Pennsylvania state courts treat narcotics dog searches differently. So different that the same scenario could result in different outcomes in federal versus state court. For example, a Philadelphia resident is pulled over for speeding. During the traffic...