What is the test for a motion to overturn an attempted premeditated murder conviction?

Defendant summarily contends the attempted premeditated murder conviction is not supported by substantial evidence. Because defendant cites no legal authority in support of his contention, we deem the point waived. (See People v. Jacobs (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 67, 76 [" ' "[E]very brief should contain a legal argument with citation of authorities on the points made. If none is furnished on a particular point, the court may treat it as waived, and pass it without consideration. [Citations.]" [Citations.]' [Citation.]"].)

Page 20

E. The Limiting Instruction on Gang Evidence

Defendant does not challenge the instruction limiting the purpose for which the jury could consider gang evidence which the trial court gave. He simply contends it is unrealistic to believe that any jury could follow such an instruction. While recognizing the general rule that jurors are presumed to follow trial court admonitions (People v. Cummings (1993) 4 Cal.4th 1233, 1302-1303), and that it is impossible to know what the jurors were thinking in this case, defendant contends the judgment should be reversed because the jury may have misused the gang evidence. To state defendant's argument is to refute it. Having failed to point to anything in the record tending to show that the jury in fact considered the gang evidence for an improper purpose, defendant's contention is nothing but speculation that does not warrant reversal.