P.

DISCUSSION

I. Robbery

In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence, we "review the whole record in the

light most favorable to the judgment . . . to determine whether it discloses substantial

evidence—that is, evidence [that] is reasonable, credible, and of solid value—such that a

reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt."

(People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 578.) We "must accept logical inferences that

the jury might have drawn from the circumstantial evidence." (People v. Maury (2003)

30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) Before a verdict may be set aside for insufficiency of the evidence,

a party must demonstrate "that upon no hypothesis whatever is there sufficient substantial

evidence to support it." (People v. Redmond (1969) 71 Cal.2d 745, 755.)

Boyd contends the evidence does not support the jury's finding that he committed

a robbery because it does not show that any force used against Molay was motivated by

3 an intent to steal. Rather, Boyd contends the evidence overwhelmingly showed that he

approached Molay intending to fight him, not steal from him. We disagree as the

evidence supports a reasonable inference that Boyd…