Is the evidence sufficient to support a finding that a defendant in a drug case intended to sell methamphetamine?

We are not persuaded. In determining the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, it does not matter that his behavior reasonably could be reconciled with a finding he did not intend to sell the methamphetamine. The question for us is not whether the jury reasonably could have reached a different conclusion; rather, it is whether any reasonable jury could have reached the conclusion this jury did. (People v. Redmond, supra, 71 Cal.2d at p. 755.) The answer to that question is "yes."