When will a jury consider the quality of evidence in determining whether the prosecution substantially relied on circumstantial evidence?

^40. As part of his argument, defendant suggests that we may consider the "quality" of the evidence in assessing whether the prosecution substantially relied on circumstantial evidence to prove his guilt. Specifically, he contends that where the quality of the direct evidence is weak, and the quality of the circumstantial evidence is strong, the prosecution has substantially relied on the circumstantial evidence. He provides no persuasive authority for our consideration of such a factor in analyzing whether instruction on circumstantial evidence was required. Indeed, defendant's suggestion appears to go to the weight of the evidence, a question which is within the exclusive province of the jury. (Evid. Code, 312, subd. (b) ["Subject to the control of the court, the jury is to determine the effect and value of the evidence addressed to it, including the credibility of witnesses"]; People v. Sanders (1995) 11 Cal.4th 475, 531 [the jury is assigned the exclusive function of resolving questions of fact, credibility of witnesses, and the weight to be accorded evidence].)