What is the test for overturning a conviction of sexual assault on the grounds of insufficient evidence?

When addressing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the record in the light most favorable to the conviction and presume the existence of every fact in support of the conviction the trier of fact could reasonably infer from the evidence. (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) "Reversal is not warranted unless it appears '''that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support [the conviction]." [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Duran (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 1448, 1457.)

"Generally speaking whether fingerprints or palmprints of the accused are alone sufficient to identify the defendant as the criminal must depend on the particular circumstances of the case. [Citations.] Where such prints are found at the place of forced entry, particularly where such location is normally inaccessible to others, there is a reasonable basis for the inference that the prints were made there at the time of the commission of the offense and under such circumstances may alone be sufficient to identify the accused. [Citations.]" (People v. Atwood (1963) 223 Cal.App.2d 316, 326, overruled on other grounds in People v. Carter (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1166, 1197-1198.)