What is the test for determining whether a reasonable trier of fact could have found a minor guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

" 'In determining whether a reasonable trier of fact could have found [the minor] guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the appellate court "must view the evidence in a light most favorable to respondent and presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence." ' [Citation.]" (People v. Young (2005) 34 Cal.4th 1149, 1175.) " 'A reasonable inference, however, "may not be based on suspicion alone, or on imagination, speculation, supposition, surmise, conjecture, or guesswork. [] . . . A finding of fact must be an inference drawn from evidence rather than . . . a mere speculation as to probabilities without evidence." '

Page 13