State v. Peirce

*830The subject of this case is a vintage 1985 Suzuki moped. Defendant appeals a conviction for the unauthorized use of that vehicle (UUV). ORS 164.135.1 On appeal, defendant assigns error to the trial court's denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal on that charge, arguing that "[t]he evidence is insufficient to show that defendant knew that the moped was stolen."2 We conclude that a rational factfinder could have found that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant knew this moped was stolen, and, therefore, the trial court did not err when it denied defendant's motion for…