What is the test for determining whether a verdict for receiving stolen property is reasonable?

Defendant maintains this court must "weigh[] the evidence presented at trial and determine whether the verdict convicting [her] of receiving stolen property is reasonable." But the rule she relies on pertains to first degree murder convictions only, which this case does not involve. (See People v. Fonville (1973) 35 Cal.App.3d 693, 703-704 ["'In the review of first degree murder verdicts... the substantial evidence formulation persists, but the appellate role is more intense, more active. Appellate duty is not satisfied, in the latter case, when substantial evidence emerges on one side. Rather, the judges must look to the evidence on both sides and not limit their scrutiny to that supporting the verdict'"].)