How has the law applied the word "personally" in the enhancement and corporal injury and great bodily injury instructions?

Here, each instruction correctly stated the law. The instruction for the corporal injury count provided that defendant's acts must be, at the very least, the "proximate cause" of the injury. The instruction for the great bodily injury enhancement provided that defendant must "personally" inflict the injury. We disagree with defendant that it is likely the jury applied the proximate cause requirement for the charged offense to the enhancement. The word "personally" in the enhancement instruction logically conveys the idea that, in order for the enhancement allegation to be true, the jury must find defendant himself performed the act that caused the physical injury. (See People v. Cole (1982) 31 Cal.3d 568, 579 [as used in the 12022.7 enhancement, "[p]ersonally" was intended to "limit the category of persons subject to the enhancement to those who directly perform the act that causes the physical injury to the victim"].) Thus, because the enhancement instruction contained the word "personally," an additional instruction stating that the proximate causation language in the corporal injury count instruction did not apply to the enhancement would be superfluous and therefore unnecessary.