When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence in a proceeding under the SVPA, what is the standard of review required for this type of challenge?

When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence in proceedings under the SVPA, "this court must review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether substantial evidence supports the determination below. [Citation.] To be substantial, the evidence must be ' "of ponderable legal significance . . . reasonable in nature, credible and of solid value." ' [Citation.]" (People v. Mercer (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 463, 466.) "In reviewing the record to determine the sufficiency of the evidence this court may not redetermine the credibility of witnesses, nor reweigh

Page 20

any of the evidence, and must draw all reasonable inferences, and resolve all conflicts, in favor of the judgment. [Citation.]" (People v. Poe (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 826, 830.) In particular, we may not reassess the credibility of experts or reweigh the relative strength of their conclusions. (Id. at p. 831.) We reverse only if no rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 269.)