What is the test for a jury to convict a defendant of murder by means of lying in wait?

the existence of every fact the jury could reasonably have deduced from the evidence. [Citation.]" (People v. Zamudio (2008) 43 Cal.4th 327, 357, 75 Cal.Rptr.3d 289, 181 P.3d 105.)

[62 Cal.4th 424]

We first note that the jury in this case was instructed on two theories of first degree murder: premeditation and deliberation, and lying in wait. When a jury is instructed on two theories of first degree murder, a first degree murder verdict will be upheld if there is insufficient evidence as to one of the theories. (People v. Lewis (2008) 43 Cal.4th 415, 507, 75 Cal.Rptr.3d 588, 181 P.3d 947.) We need not decide whether there was sufficient evidence of murder by means of lying in wait because we conclude there was sufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation. Contrary to Justice Chin's view (see conc. & dis. opn., post, 196 Cal.Rptr.3d at 475, 363 P.3d at 86), a conclusion that there was insufficient evidence of lying-in-wait murder does not mean there was no premeditation and deliberation, but only that these mental states must be established by another route.