Does the substantial evidence rule, which stresses the importance of isolated evidence, risk misleading the reviewing court into abdicating its duty to appraise the whole record?

Although we recognize our duty to "view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution [citation] ... [, a] formulation of the substantial evidence rule which stresses the importance of isolated evidence supporting the judgment ... risks misleading the [reviewing] court into abdicating its duty to appraise the whole record." (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 577, 162 Cal.Rptr. 431, 606 P.2d 738.) In particular, we must take care not to " affirm[ ] the trier of fact on isolated evidence torn from the context of the whole record [by] ... leap[ing] from an acceptable premise, that a trier of fact could reasonably believe the

[217 Cal.Rptr.3d 360]