In State v. Johannes, 229 Wis. 2d 215, 598 N.W.2d 299 (Ct. App. 1999), the Court reiterated: Our review for sufficiency of the evidence supporting a criminal conviction is limited. It is the State's burden to prove the elements of each allegation beyond a reasonable doubt. We may not reverse a conviction "unless the evidence, viewed most favorably to the state and the conviction, is so insufficient in probative value and force that it can be said as a matter of law that no trier of fact, acting reasonably, could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." We do not substitute our judgment for the jury's. The jury determines the credibility of the witnesses, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence and draws reasonable inferences from the evidence. Our review is the same whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial. "If any possibility exists that the trier of fact could have drawn the appropriate inferences from the evidence adduced at trial to find the requisite guilt," we may not overturn a verdict even if we believe that the trier of fact should not have found guilt based on the evidence before it. (598 N.W.2d at 303.)