What is the test for a jury to convict a defendant of robbery?

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."' [Citation.]" (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) We "must . . . presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence. [Citations.]" (People v. Reilly (1970) 3 Cal.3d 421, 425.)

The rule and rationale of People v. Burns (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1251 is controlling here. There, the defendant grabbed the victim's purse, which was on her elbow. The victim "tried to clutch the purse, but [the defendant] stepped on her toe and grabbed the purse. [The victim] was unable to hold onto it any longer. [The defendant] pulled the purse down and forcibly took it away from [the victim's] grip, then ran out the door with the purse." (Id., at p. 1255.) The court concluded that the evidence established a "robbery, and there is no basis in the record for a jury to find that it was nothing more than grand theft from the person." (Id., at p. 1259.) The court stated: "We hold, . . . that where a person wrests away personal property from another person, who resists the effort to do so, the crime is robbery, not merely theft." (Id., at p. 1257.)