When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction of a defendant in a sexual assault case, what is the test for overturning the verdict?

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, " 'we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it contains substantial evidencethat is, evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid valuefrom which a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.' " (People v. Avila (2009) 46 Cal.4th 680, 701.) We do not re weigh the evidence or reevaluate the credibility of witnesses. (People v. Lindberg (2008) 45 Cal.4th 1, 27.)

" ' "If the circumstances reasonably justify the trier of fact's findings, the opinion of the reviewing court that the circumstances might also reasonably be reconciled with a contrary finding does not warrant a reversal of the judgment." ' [Citations.]" (People v. Cravens (2012) 53 Cal.4th 500, 508.) Therefore, before we may set aside the judgment, it must be clear that " ' "upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient evidence to support" ' the jury's verdict." (People v. Zamudio (2008) 43 Cal.4th 327, 357.)