What is the test for substantial evidence in a murder case?

When considering defendant's contention that substantial evidence does not support his conviction of first degree murder, the standard enunciated in People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576-578, 162 Cal.Rptr. 431, 606 P.2d 738, is applicable. We must review the whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment below to determine whether it discloses substantial evidence--that is, evidence which is reasonable, credible, and of solid value--such that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In performing this task, we do not limit our review to that evidence which is favorable to respondent. The issue is resolved in the light of the whole record--the entire story put before the jury--rather than a review of isolated bits of evidence selected by the respondent. From that review, we judge whether the evidence of the commission of each of the essential elements of the crime is substantial enough to support the conclusion of a reasonable trier of fact under the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard. It is not enough for the respondent simply to point to "some" evidence supporting the finding. The evidence, together with those inferences which can be reasonably deduced therefrom, must be substantial in light of the other facts.