Is a jury required to unanimously agree on which particular felony formed the basis for appellant's street terrorism conviction?

Nor was the jury required to unanimously agree on which particular felony formed the basis for appellant's street terrorism conviction. The purpose of the unanimity requirement is "'to prevent the jury from amalgamating evidence of multiple offenses, no one of which has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, in order to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant must have done something sufficient to convict on one count.' [Citation.]" (People v. Russo (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1124, 1132, italics added.) Therefore, "where the evidence shows only a single discrete crime but leaves room for disagreement as to exactly how that crime was committed or what the defendant's precise role was, the jury need not unanimously agree on the basis or, as the cases often put it, the 'theory' whereby the defendant is guilty. [Citation.]" (Ibid., italics added.)