Is substantial evidence sufficient to overturn a motion for a new trial?

Scott contends that even if this court finds substantial evidence of attempted robbery, we should reverse the trial court because it applied the wrong standard in denying his oral motion for a new trial. He contends the trial court abused its discretion by employing the substantial evidence standard, rather than properly weighing the evidence independently. (See People v. Knoller (2007) 41 Cal.4th 139, 156 [abuse of discretion to base decision on incorrect legal standard].)