What is the test for a jury to convict appellant of felony murder under the special circumstance?

Reading those instructions together it is reasonable to conclude that the jurors either all had to agree appellant was the killer, or all agree he had an intent to kill or was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life. (See People v. Covarrubias (2016) 1 Cal.5th 838, 927, 207 Cal.Rptr.3d 228, 378 P.3d 615.) Thus, the jury could have understood the instructions as requiring a not true finding on the special circumstance if some jurors believed that the victim was killed unintentionally, while others believed appellant was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life. The evidence could have supported both of these possibilities. Convicting appellant of felony murder would be permissible given such a disagreement, but the jury may have issued a not true finding based on their inability to unanimously agree on a theory under the special

[66 Cal.App.5th 162]