What is the standard of review for a challenge to the sufficiency of evidence in a murder case?

"In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we do not determine the facts ourselves. Rather, we examine the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it discloses substantial evidenceevidence that is reasonable, credible and of solid valuesuch that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citations.] We presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence. [Citation.] [] The same standard of review applies to cases in which the prosecution relies primarily on circumstantial evidence and to special circumstance allegations. [Citation.] [I]f the circumstances reasonably justify the jury's findings, the judgment may not be reversed simply because the circumstances might also reasonably be reconciled with a contrary finding. [Citation.] We do not reweigh evidence or reevaluate a witness's credibility. [Citation.]" (People v. Nelson (2011) 51 Cal.4th 198, 210 [internal quotation marks omitted].)

Page 22

b. Evidence of intent to kill

A conviction for willful, deliberate and premeditated murder requires proof of express malice, that is of an intent to kill. "Evidence of intent to kill is usually inferred from defendant's acts and the circumstances of the crime. [Citation.]" (People v. Ramos (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 43, 48.)