In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence in a sexual assault case, what is the test for overturning the conviction?

In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we determine whether after viewing "'the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.'" (People v. Holt (1997) 15 Cal.4th 619, 667.) We do not weigh the evidence or decide the credibility of the witnesses. We draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the judgment. "Reversal on this ground is unwarranted unless it appears 'that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to

Page 18

support [the conviction].'" (People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 331.)