What is the test for a jury to convict a defendant of a first-degree murder?

"Although it is the duty of the [trier of fact] to acquit a defendant if it finds that circumstantial evidence is susceptible of two interpretations, one of which suggests guilt and the other innocence [citations], it is the [trier of fact], not the appellate court which must be convinced of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. ' "If the circumstances reasonably justify the trier of fact's findings, the opinion of the reviewing court that the circumstances might also be reasonably reconciled with a contrary finding does not warrant a reversal of the judgment." ' " (People v. Bean (1988) 46 Cal.3d 919, 932-933.)

Here, the jury was presented with the alternative theories of deliberate and premeditated murder and felony murder with arson as the underlying felony. Murder is defined by statute as the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. ( 187, subd. (a).) A jury is entitled to find the defendant committed premeditated and deliberate first degree murder, as charged here, where there is evidence the defendant inflicted fatal force upon the victim while acting with intent to cause death after sufficient time, no matter how brief, to reflect on the consequences of his behavior. (See People v. Gonzales and Soliz (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 294 ["[p]remeditation and deliberation . . . can occur in a brief interval: ' " '[t]he test is not time, but reflection,' " ' as ' " '[t]houghts

Page 7