Does the prosecution have sufficient evidence to convict defendant on the alternate theory that defendant used words likely to provoke a violent reaction?

^3. This conclusion renders it unnecessary to address defendant's contention that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction on the prosecution's alternate theory that defendant used words likely to provoke a violent reaction. (See People v. Catley (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 500, 506 ["If a jury is instructed on two alternative theories of criminal liability, one of which is legally sufficient and one of which is not, we will affirm unless the record affirmatively demonstrates the jury relied on the unsupported ground."].)