What is the test for insufficient evidence to support a conviction for failing to register as a sex offender?

Cuevas argues on appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for failing to register as a sex offender because the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Cuevas was living in California on the dates relevant to each charge. "In reviewing a claim for sufficiency of the evidence, we must determine whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime or special circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt. We review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment below to determine whether it discloses sufficient evidencethat is, evidence that is reasonable, credible, and of solid valuesupporting the decision, and not whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation.] We neither reweigh the evidence nor reevaluate the credibility of witnesses. [Citation.] We presume in support of the judgment the existence of every fact the jury reasonably could deduce from the evidence. [Citation.] If the circumstances reasonably justify the findings made by the trier of fact, reversal of the judgment is not warranted simply because the circumstances might also reasonably be reconciled with a contrary finding." (People v. Jennings (2010) 50 Cal.4th 616, 638-639.)

Section 290.015, subdivision (a) provides that a person subject to the sex offender registration requirement "shall register, or reregister if he or she has previously registered, upon release from incarceration, placement, commitment, or release upon probation." The individual "must register with the chief of police of the city in which he or she is residing, or with the sheriff of the county if he or she is residing in an unincorporated area or a city that has no police department. [Citation.] Registration must be made within five working days of 'coming into, or changing his or her residence within' any city, county, or city and county. [Citation.]" (People v. Armas (2011) 191 Cal. App.4th 1173, 1177.) Offenders without a residence are considered to be transients

Page 6