What is the role of the Court of Appeal in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence?

"The role of an appellate court in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence is limited. The court must 'review the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment below to determine whether it discloses substantial evidencethat is, evidence which is reasonable, credible, and of solid valuesuch that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.' [Citations.] []... But it is the jury, not the appellate court, which must be convinced of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation.] Therefore, an appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the jury." (People v. Ceja, supra, 4 Cal.4th at pp. 1138-1139.) We do not reweigh the evidence; even if the circumstances "might reasonably be reconciled with a contrary finding[, this] would not warrant reversal of the judgment." (People v. Proctor (1992) 4 Cal.4th 499, 529.)

Section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1) provides that "any person who is convicted of a felony committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members" shall be punished pursuant to that section. (People v. Gardeley (1996) 14 Cal.4th 605, 616-617.) Expert opinion may form the basis from which a jury can find that the crime comes within the ambit of a section 186.22 gang enhancement pursuant to which the People must prove that the defendant committed a crime for the benefit of a criminal street gang with the specific intent to promote criminal conduct by gang members. (People v. Gardeley, supra, at pp. 616-617.)

Page 12