Whether a federal court of appeals reviewing a defendant's direct-appeal challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction must apply the every-element, reasonable-doubt standard articulated in Jackson v. Virginia

question presented is whether a federal court of appeals reviewing a defendant’s direct-appeal challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction must apply the every-element, reasonable-doubt standard articulated in Jackson v. Virginia. ii 2. Whether an accused has made a sufficient showing of the need for grand jury transcripts under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(3)(E) when he demonstrates that the government had, at the time it obtained the indictment against him, confused him with another person and had apparently treated that other person’s acts as the defendant’s acts.