Can a jury infer a person's gang membership based on their tattoos?

¹ Defendant argues the jury could not infer he was a gang member based on his tattoos because he was in the process of having them removed. We disagree. Defendant did not introduce any evidence establishing he was having his tattoos removed. Instead, the gang expert agreed one explanation for the faded quality of the tattoos was that defendant was having them removed. The jury was free to reject defendant's suggestion and could reasonably infer that the "G" and "ST" tattoos, while faded, were still an indication of defendant's gang membership. Moreover, as described further above, there was additional evidence from which the jury could infer defendant was still an active Grape Street Crips gang member. "[T]hat there is conflicting or contrary evidence is only a factual and credibility determination performed by the jury. We may not take it into consideration but only decide if there is enough evidence supporting the finding, and the record reflects sufficient evidence to affirm the substantive crime and the enhancement." (People v. Martinez (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1324, 1334.)