STATE v. DREW

Tyler Christensen and J.H. Andersen, for Appellants. The appellate court cannot and will not shift the responsibility to the jury, but will examine the evidence to ascertain whether or not the verdict is supported by the evidence. ( State v. Nesbit, 4 Idaho 548, 43 P. 66; State v. Jones, 25 Idaho 587, 138 P. 1116; State v. Trego, 25 Idaho 625, 138 P. 1124; State v. Donnington, 246 Mo. 343, 151 S.W. 975; State v. Baker, 6 Idaho 496, 56 P. 81; State v. Anderson, 6 Idaho 706, 59 P. 180.) If the proof fails to establish either of the elements of the crime necessary to constitute the crime charged, the verdict and judgment of conviction thereon will be set aside. ( State v. Sullivan, 34 Idaho 68, 17 A.L.R. 902, 199 P. 647; State v. Crawford, 59 Utah, 39, 201 P. 1030; Russell v. State, 86 Tex. Cr. 587, 219 S.W. 835.) W.D. Gillis, Attorney General, Fred J. Babcock, Assistant Attorney General, and Z. Reed Millar, Prosecuting Attorney, for Respondent. A verdict supported by sufficient evidence or substantially supported by evidence will not be disturbed on appeal. ( State v. Williams, 12 Idaho 483, 86 P. 53; State v. Levy, 9 Idaho 483, 75 P. 227; State v. Abbott, 38 Idaho 61, 213 Pac. 1024, 224 P. 791; State v. Starcher, 39 Idaho 327, 227 Pac. 386; State v. Bariger, 39 Idaho 328, 227 P. 34; State v. Smith, 30 Idaho 337, 164 P. 519; State v. Mox Mox, 28 Idaho 176, 152 P. 802; State v. McLennan, 40 Idaho 286, 231 Pac. 718; State v. Brassfield, 40 Idaho 203, 232 P. 1.)