The California Supreme Court held that testimony about the reputational benefits of crime does not support an inference that a lone gang member committed crime for gang-related reasons — as opposed to acting other, more personal motives. Because in this case there was not an adequate basis for drawing the necessary inference about appellant’s intent, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeal and remanded for resentencing. After remand for resentencing, appellant’s sentence went from two consecutive terms of 23 years to life, to 6 years 8 months. He was released on time served.