People v. Lopez CA3

DISCUSSION

Lopez’s sole contention on appeal is there was not substantial evidence to support his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. In particular, he argues there was insufficient evidence that he knowingly and intentionally possessed the rifle, where the evidence suggested he went to the storage unit to gather all his guns yet left one rifle behind. He contends that because this defies logic, his possession of the rifle was more accidental than willful. A. Standard of Review Where the sufficiency of evidence is challenged on appeal, we review the record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it discloses substantial evidence. (People v. Snow (2003) 30 Cal.4th 43, 66.) Substantial evidence is evidence that is “reasonable, credible and of solid value — from which a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” (Ibid.) We draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the judgment. (People v. Rodriguez (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1, 11.) We will not set aside a judgment for insufficient evidence unless it clearly appears “that on no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial evidence to support the…