What is the standard of review used by courts to determine the sufficiency of evidence in a sexual assault case?

In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, "courts apply the 'substantial evidence' test. Under this standard, the court 'must review the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment below to determine whether it discloses substantial evidencethat is, evidence which is reasonable, credible, and of solid valuesuch that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.' [Citations.]" (People v. Cuevas (1995) 12 Cal.4th 252, 260-261.) In so doing, the court "presumes in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence." (People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1053.)

The standard of review is the same when the prosecution relies on circumstantial evidence to prove guilt. (People v. Bean (1988) 46 Cal.3d 919, 932.) "Although it is the duty of the jury to acquit a

Page 8