Appellant was convicted of second degree murder. D.C.Code § 22-2403 (1951). Her chief contention on appeal is that the District Court erred in denying her motion for a judgment of acquittal by reason of insanity. We cannot agree. On the testimony here, the issue was properly one for the jury, and we have concluded “that the result is rationally consistent with the evidence, measured by the required degree of proof.” Douglas v. United States, 1956, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 232, at page 239, 239 F. 2d 52, at page 59; cf. Satterwhite v. United States, 1959, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 398, 267 F.2d 675. We find no reversible error as to this or any of the other matters urged by appellant.

Affirmed.