When reviewing the sufficiency of evidence supporting a conviction, what is the standard of review?

When reviewing on appeal the sufficiency of evidence supporting a conviction, this court must consider the evidence presented and all logical inferences from that evidence in light of the legal definition of the charged crime. "Settled principles of appellate review require us to review the entire 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 valuefrom which a reasonable trier of fact could find that the defendant" committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Perez (1992) 2 Cal.4th 1117, 1124.) "The standard of review is the same in cases such as this where the People rely primarily on circumstantial evidence. [Citation.]" (Ibid.)