Can a jury agree on one theory of murder?

The trial court instructed the jury on two theories of first degree murder, premeditated murder and felony murder, but did not instruct the jury to agree on the theory of murder. Defendant argues the failure to require jury unanimity on one of these two theories violated his federal and state constitutional rights because the two types of murder are based on different elements. Defendant points to language in Dillon , supra , 34 Cal.3d at page 476, 194 Cal.Rptr. 390, 668 P.2d 697, to suggest that the crimes "differ in a fundamental respect" and require the prosecution to prove different elementsdeliberate and premeditated murder requires malice, while felony murder does not. But as we have previously explained, "[p]remeditated murder and felony murder are not distinct crimes; rather, they are alternative theories of liability, and jurors need not unanimously agree on a particular theory of liability in order to reach a unanimous verdict." ( Sattiewhite , supra , 59 Cal.4th at p. 479, 174 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 328 P.3d 1, citing People v. Benavides (2005) 35 Cal.4th 69, 101, 24 Cal.Rptr.3d 507, 105 P.3d 1099.) We decline to revisit these well-established principles here.

[5 Cal.5th 286]