Does the holding in Griffin v United States allow a conviction based on alternate theories of offense when only one theory is supported by the evidence, but the state presented no evidence on the other theory?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1.. DOES THE HOLDING IN GRIFFIN V UNITED STATES, 502 U.S. 46, 112 S.CT 466 (1992), WHICH MODIFIED YATES V. UNITED STATES, 354 U.S. 298, 77 S.CT 1064 (1957), ALLOW A CONVICTION BASED ON ALTERNATE THEORIES OF OFFENSE WHEN ONLY ONE THEORY IS SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE, BUT THE STATE PRESENTED NO EVIDENCE ON THE OTHER THEORY? 2. DOES IT VIOLATE DUE PROCESS AND/OR EQUAL PROTECTION FOR A DEFENDANT TO BE CONVICTED AS A PRINCIPAL TO A CRIME WHEN THE ACTUAL PERPETRATOR, IN THE SAME : TRIAL, IS ACQUITTED OF THE CRIME? ,