Is there substantial evidence to support a finding that defendant committed assault with a semi-automatic firearm?

Even had the trial court instructed the jury that the predicate offenses could be proven by the "commission" of one or more of those crimes, there is not substantial evidence to support a finding that defendant committed assault with a semi-automatic firearm ( 245, subd. (b)) for purposes of constituting one or more predicate offenses under section 186.22, subdivision (e). As noted above, "'In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support an enhancement, we review the entire record in the light most favorable to the judgment to determine whether it contains substantial evidence . . . from which a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citation.]'" (People v. Livingston, supra, 53 Cal.4th at p. 1170; People v. Martinez (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1324, 1329 [specifically applying the substantial evidence test to a contention that a section 186.22, subdivision (b) gang

Page 8