more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit.” Cal. CoRP. Code § 16101(7) (2013). Whether parties have entered into a partnership relationship, rather than some other form of relationship, is a question of fact “to be determined by the trier of fact from the evidence and inferences to be drawn therefrom” and depends on whether they intended to share in the profits, losses and the management and control of the enterprise. See Bank of Cal. v. Connolly, 86 Cal.App.3d 350, 364 [111 Cal.Rptr. 468] (Cal.Ct.App.1973); Nelson v. Abraham [29 Cal.2d 745], 177 P.2d 931, 933 (Cal.1947). Property co-ownership of any sort, as well as profit-sharing, are factors which tend to establish partnership. But see Holmes v. Lerner [74 Cal.App.4th 442], 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 130, 138 (Cal.CtApp.1999) (<HOLDING>). Each partner is an agent of the partnership
holding that sharing of profits is one evidence of partnership but not a required element recognizing that if there is evidence upon which one may reasonably infer an element of the crime the evidence is sufficient to sustain that element and where reasonable minds could differ the evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction holding that concealment is just one factor to consider and is not a mandatory element holding that reasonable reliance is not an element of the defense holding the connection is an element