What is the standard of review for an arson case?

" 'In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we do not determine the facts ourselves. Rather, we "examine the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it discloses substantial evidenceevidence that is reasonable, credible and of solid valuesuch that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." [Citations.] We presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence. [Citation.] [] The same standard of review applies to cases in which the prosecution relies primarily on circumstantial evidence and to special circumstance allegations. [Citation.] "[I]f the circumstances reasonably justify the jury's findings, the judgment may not be reversed simply because the circumstances might also reasonably be reconciled with a contrary finding." [Citation.] We do not reweigh evidence or reevaluate a witness's credibility.' " (People v. Nelson (2011) 51 Cal.4th 198, 210.)

"A person is guilty of arson when he or she willfully and maliciously sets fire to or burns or causes to be burned or who aids, counsels, or procures the burning of, any structure, forest land, or property." ( 451.) " 'Property' " includes personal property. ( 450, subd. (c).) "Willfully" means intentionally doing the prohibited act or omission. (People v. Atkins (2001) 25 Cal.4th 76, 85 (Atkins).) " 'Maliciously' imports a wish to vex, defraud, annoy, or injure another person, or an intent to do a wrongful act . . . ." ( 450, subd. (e).) The "willfully and maliciously" requirement of the arson statute ensures that the setting of the fire is a deliberate and intentional act, rather than an accidental or unintentional ignition or act of setting a fire. (Atkins, supra, at p. 88; People v. Tanner (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 948, 955 (Tanner).)