What is the test for reading only the word only in the instruction to a jury in a motor vehicle case?

requires reading the word "only" into the portion first quoted above. We do not believe any reasonable juror would have so read that portion of the instruction. (See People v. Walker (1935) 5 Cal.App.2d 290, 293 ["no reasonable juror could read into the language used the meaning now assigned to it by the appellant"].) Instead, that portion of the instruction correctly informed the jury about the mens rea requirement of the special circumstance; then, immediately thereafter, the instruction clarified that in the absence of intent to kill, both reckless indifference to human life and major participation were required. This is an accurate statement of the law.

There was no instructional error.