What is the test for a claim of insufficient evidence in a criminal threat case?

When we review a claim of insufficient evidence, we determine whether, viewing the whole record in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the record discloses substantial evidence - evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid value - from which a reasonable trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Osband (1996) 13 Cal.4th 622, 690.)

In People v. Toledo (2001) 26 Cal.4th 221 (Toledo), the court "divide[d] the crime of criminal threat into five constituent elements . . . ." (Id. at p. 227.) The prosecution must establish "all of the following: (1) that the defendant 'willfully threaten[ed] to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person,' (2) that the defendant made the threat 'with the specific intent that the statement . . . is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out,' (3) that the threat--which may be 'made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device'--was 'on its face and under the circumstances in which it [was] made, . . . so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat,' (4) that the threat actually caused the person threatened 'to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family's safety,' and (5) that the threatened person's fear was 'reasonabl[e]' under the circumstances." (Id. at pp. 227-228, quoting Pen. Code, 422, subd. (a).)

Page 7