What is the test for determining whether there is malice or malice aforethought for the purposes of sentence enhancement purposes?

1 The information did not allege that the attempted murders were willful, deliberate, and premeditated for sentence enhancement purposes. (See People v. Bright (1996) 12 Cal.4th 652, 669, 49 Cal.Rptr.2d 732, 909 P.2d 1354.)

1 That malice aforethought does not exist only in relation to an intended victim does not mean that liability for murder extends to all unintended victims or even to any unintended victim. Proximate cause is required for each. (See, e.g., People v. Roberts, supra, 2 Cal.4th at pp. 315-320, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 276, 826 P.2d 274; cf. Model Pen.Code, 2.03, subd. (2)(a) [providing that, "[w]hen purposely or knowingly causing a particular result is an element of an offense, the element is not established if the actual result is not within the purpose or the contemplation of the actor unless" "the actual result differs from that designed or contemplated, as the case may be, only in the respect that a different person ... is injured or affected"]; id., 2.03, subd. (3)(a) [providing that, "[w]hen recklessly ... causing a particular result is an element of an offense, the element is not established if the actual result is not within the risk of which the actor is aware ... unless" "the actual result differs from the probable result only in the respect that a different person ... is injured or affected"].)