What is the test for a defendant to challenge a finding of insufficient evidence in a sexual assault case?

When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, appellate courts must review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it discloses substantial evidenceevidence which is reasonable, credible, and of solid valuesuch that a reasonable trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. While a jury must acquit if it finds the evidence susceptible of a reasonable interpretation favoring innocence, it is the jury not the reviewing court that weighs the evidence, resolves conflicting inferences and determines whether guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt. Where the circumstances reasonably justify the jury's findings, the opinion of the reviewing court that the circumstances might also be reasonably reconciled with a contrary finding will not warrant reversal of the judgment. (People v. Casares (2016) 62 Cal.4th 808, 823-824.) Before a judgment can be set aside for insufficient evidence, a reviewing court must conclude that on no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence in support of the verdict. (People v. Dealba (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 1142, 1149.)