What is the legal test for overturning a conviction for sexual assault?

"In assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it discloses evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid value such that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." (People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 331.) "The test is whether substantial evidence supports the decision, not whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." (People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 432.) Reversal is only warranted where it clearly appears "'that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support [the conviction].'" (People v. Bolin, supra, 18 Cal.4th at p. 331.)

It is the exclusive function of the trier of fact to assess the credibility of witnesses and draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. (People v. Alcala (1984) 36 Cal.3d 604, 623.) The hurdle to secure a reversal is just as high when the prosecution's case

Page 23

depends on circumstantial evidence. (People v. Stanley (1995) 10 Cal.4th 764, 792.) "'"'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.]'"'" (Id. at p. 793.)