What is the test for a jury to overturn a conviction for burglary?

An appellate court must accept logical inferences that the jury might have drawn from circumstantial evidence. (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) Before setting aside the judgment of the trial court for insufficiency of the evidence, it must clearly appear that there was no hypothesis whatever upon which there was substantial evidence to support the verdict. (People v. Conners (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 443, 453; People v. Sanghera (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1567, 1573.)

A defendant's intent to commit theft can be established in part by secret and noiseless entry in an unusual manner at an odd hour of the night in a residence where the defendant was not an invited guest. (People v. Corral (1964) 224 Cal.App.2d 300, 304.) Because of the location of the fingerprints in this case, the jury could properly infer that they had been impressed at the time the burglary was committed. (Id. at p. 306.) Fingerprints are the strongest evidence of the identity of a person. A single fingerprint near an unusual means of access is sufficient to support a burglary conviction. (People v.

Page 5