What is the standard of review in a murder case?

"The standard of appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury verdict is settled. 'In assessing a claim of insufficiency of evidence, the reviewing court's task is to review the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it discloses substantial evidencethat is, evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid valuesuch that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation.] ... The standard of review is the same in cases in which the prosecution relies mainly on circumstantial evidence. [Citation.] "'Although it is the duty of the jury to acquit a defendant if it finds that circumstantial evidence is susceptible of two interpretations, one of which suggests guilt and the other innocence [citations], it is the jury, not the appellate court[,] which must be convinced of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. "'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.]'" [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Story (2009) 45 Cal.4th 1282, 1296.)

In determining whether a murder was committed with deliberation and premeditation, we apply well-established rules. Premeditated and deliberate murder does not require proof that the "defendant maturely and meaningfully reflected upon the gravity of his or her act." ( 189.) Instead, "'In this context, "premeditated" means "considered beforehand," and "deliberate" means "formed or arrived at or determined upon as a result of careful thought and weighing of considerations for and against the proposed course of action."' [Citation.] 'An intentional killing is premeditated and deliberate if it occurred as the result of preexisting thought and reflection rather than unconsidered or rash impulse.' [Citation.] A reviewing court normally considers three kinds of evidence to determine whether a finding of premeditation and deliberation is adequately supportedpreexisting motive, planning activity, and manner of killing '[b]ut these factors need not be present in any particular combination to find substantial

Page 8

evidence of premeditation and deliberation.' [Citations.]" (People v. Jurado (2006) 38 Cal.4th 72, 118-119.)