Does Section 186.22, subdivision (a) of the Criminal Code of California apply to a defendant who was convicted of being a member of a criminal street gang?

While we recognize that it is the duty of the jury to acquit defendant if the circumstantial evidence is susceptible of two reasonable interpretations and one points to innocence, once the jury reaches its verdict we do not reweigh the evidence. Even if we were to conclude that the circumstantial evidence might lead to a different result, reversal is not mandated. Our task is to determine whether any reasonable trier of fact could have reached the same conclusion as the jury. (People v. Holt (1997) 15 Cal.4th 619, 668.) We conclude the evidence is sufficient to support the jury's finding defendant committed his crime for the benefit of his gang.

Section 186.22, subdivision (a) punishes a "person who actively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, and who willfully promotes, furthers, or assists in any felonious criminal conduct by members of that gang...." The offense has three elements: "Active participation in a criminal street gang, in the sense of participation that is more than nominal or passive,... 'knowledge that [the gang's] members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity, ' and... 'willfully promot[ing], further[ing], or assist[ing] in any felonious criminal conduct by members of that gang.' [Citation.]" (People v. Lamas (2007) 42 Cal.4th 516, 523.)

Page 14