That the victim's television set was being taken from his apartment when Mr. Meade interrupted the [murderer], and the fact that the victim's wallet was discovered in Reyes' apartment was circumstantial evidence that [ ] [he] intended to take these items by force and fear from the victim at the time of the killing. ( People v. Cavanaugh, 44 Cal.2d 252, 266 [ 282 P.2d 53], cert. den. 350 U.S. 950 [100 L.Ed. 828, 76 S.Ct. 325]; People v. Watters, 246 Cal.App.2d 154, 157 [ 54 Cal.Rptr. 494]; People v. Baglin, 271 Cal.App.2d 411, 417 [ 76 Cal.Rptr. 863].) [ ] Reyes admitted that just a few hours before going to the victim's house he had stolen some hubcaps from a parked truck near his home because he wanted the hubcaps.
Where a police officer merely provides an opportunity for a defendant with a preexisting intent to commit an offense there is no entrapment. ( People v. Watters, 246 Cal.App.2d 154 [ 54 Cal.Rptr. 494].) (14) The question of whether a defendant was entrapped is generally one for the trier of fact and where the finding of no entrapment is supported by substantial evidence, it will not be disturbed on appeal.