If there is insufficient evidence, would there have been good arguments to make in the trial court?

Those would have been good arguments to make in the trial court. Instead, defense counsel conceded that if, as the evidence showed, the gun was located behind the passenger seat in Wynn's vehicle, it would have been within arm's reach of Wynn while he was driving. Fortunately for Wynn, we are not bound by what the parties did or did not argue below in a sufficiency-of-the-evidence case. Our job, as noted above, is to determine whether there is substantial evidence to support the challenged decision. In so doing, we "'review the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the [trier of fact] could reasonably have deduced from the evidence." (People v. Manibusan, supra, 58 Cal.4th at p. 87.) We must also keep in mind, "A reversal for insufficient evidence "is unwarranted unless it appears 'that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support'"'" the trier of fact's decision. (Ibid.)