If appellant is convicted of three counts of attempted murder, can he be found guilty of all three counts even if he failed to aim his gun at a specific target?

Appellant further argues that People v. Smith is inapplicable here, because his failure to aim the gun means that there was no "line of fire" as there was in that case.

Page 16

(See People v. Smith, supra, 37 Cal.4th at p. 744.) This is simply nonsensical. Whether or not a gun is aimed at a particular target, the path of its bullets constitutes a "line of fire" as that phrase is used in this context. In short, the jury was justified in finding that appellant intended to kill any individual who was part of the dense crowd into which he fired. (See People v. Stone (2009) 46 Cal.4th 131, 134 ["The mental state required for attempted murder is the intent to kill a human being, not a particular human being" (italics in original)]; id. at p. 140 ["a person who intends to kill can be guilty of attempted murder even if the person has no specific target in mind"].) We therefore conclude that all three attempted murder convictions are supported by substantial evidence.