What is the legal test for reversal of a jury's finding of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on a charge of membership of a criminal street gang?

defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.' " (People v. Edwards (2013) 57 Cal.4th 658, 715.) "A reversal for insufficient evidence 'is unwarranted unless it appears "that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support" ' the jury's verdict." (People v. Zamudio (2008) 43 Cal.4th 327, 357.) The jury's findings on enhancement allegations are reviewed under the same standard. (See People v. Stanley (1995) 10 Cal.4th 764, 792-793.)

Section 186.22 proscribes the substantive offense of active participation in a criminal street gang, as set forth in subdivision (a), and includes enhancement provisions, which are found in subdivision (b). (Elizalde, supra, 61 Cal.4th at pp. 538-539.) The elements of the substantive offense are: "First, active participation in a criminal street gang, in the sense of participation that is more than nominal or passive; second, knowledge that the gang's members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity; and third, the willful promotion, furtherance, or assistance in any felonious criminal conduct by members of that gang." (People v. Rodriguez (2012) 55 Cal.4th 1125, 1130 (Rodriguez).) The enhancement provisions apply when an offense is committed "for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members." ( 186.22, subd. (b).)