What is the test for reversal of a conviction under Section 186.22 of the Criminal Code?

In evaluating a claim the evidence is insufficient to support a true finding on an allegation, we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment 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. Hillhouse (2002) 27 Cal.4th 469, 496.) "We draw all reasonable inferences in support of the judgment. [Citation.]" (People v. Wader (1993) 5 Cal.4th 610, 640.) Reversal is not warranted unless it appears "'that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support [the conviction].' [Citation.]" (People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 331.)

Section 186.22, subdivision (b)(4) applies to "[a]ny person who is convicted of a felony . . . committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members[.]" Application of the gang enhancement "does not depend on membership in a gang at all." (People v. Albillar (2010) 51 Cal.4th 47, 67-68.)

Section 186.22, subdivision (b)(4) has two prongs. The first prong requires the crime to be "committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang." This prong is intended to make it clear the enhancement applies only if the crime is "'gang related.'" (People v. Gardeley (1996) 14 Cal.4th 605, 622, overruled on other grounds by Sanchez, supra, 63 Cal.4th at p. 686, fn. 13.)