Is there any case law supporting the argument that evidence of motive alone is insufficient to establish that defendant was responsible for the crime?

Although defendant argues that evidence of motive alone is insufficient to establish that he was "responsible" for the offense, there is evidence beyond motive in the record herenamely, as detailed above, defendant's conduct before the offense and the perpetrator's conduct during the offense. Moreover, the cases cited by defendant in support of his argument are inapposite, as they involve the evidentiary requirements to present the defense of third party culpability. (See People v. Blankenship (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 840, 848 [observing that third party motive evidence offered by a

Page 24