¶ 4 The court of appeals reversed. State v. West, 224 Ariz. 575, 576 ¶ 1, 233 P.3d 1154, 1155 (App. 2010). The court concluded that, in finding "insufficient evidence to support the defendants' convictions" but without identifying any evidentiary or other legal error at trial, the trial court had improperly "re-determined the quantum of evidence in violation of Hyder."

We determined the court had erred procedurally in granting the motions and reversed. State v. West, 224 Ariz. 575, 233 P.3d 1154 (App. 2010). The supreme court vacated our decision and remanded the appeal to this court to consider the merits of the state's appeal in light of its decision.

Reviewing the trial court's Rule 20 determination for an abuse of discretion, this court reversed. State v. West, 224 Ariz. 575, ¶¶ 8, 15, 233 P.3d 1154, 1156, 1158 (App.2010) (West I ). However, on review, our supreme court clarified that the “question of sufficiency of the evidence is one of law, subject to de novo review on appeal.”

A trial court abuses its discretion when it commits an error of law. State v. West, 224 Ariz. 575, ¶ 8, 233 P.3d 1154, 1156 (App. 2010). ¶ 6 Second-degree murder is a lesser-included offense of premeditated first-degree murder, the difference between the two being premeditation.