When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, what is the standard of review required by the California Court of Appeal to determine whether the evidence is sufficient?

When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether it discloses "evidence which is reasonable, credible, and of solid value," from which a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Casares (2016) 62 Cal.4th 808, 823, reh'g denied (Apr. 20, 2016.) We do not weigh the evidence, resolve conflicting inferences or determine whether the prosecution has established its case beyond a reasonable doubt. (Ibid.) Even if the evidence is subject to conflicting interpretations, we will not reverse the judgment if the jury's findings are reasonable. (Id. at pp. 823-824.) The same standard of review applies when the prosecutor's case relies primarily on circumstantial evidence. (Id. at p. 823.)

B. Possession for Sale