Does a trial court have any authority to re-open argument before the jury has reached an impasse?

Although the "obvious intent of [Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.1036] is to assist the jury in achieving a verdict, if possible, after it has reached an impasse" (People v. Salazar, supra, 227 Cal.App.4th at p. 1089), we do not read this rule so narrowly as to restrict a trial court's inherent authority to control the proceedings before it in a manner it reasonably determines furthers the parties' best interests and ensures the defendant a fair trial. In any event, the trial court's decision to reopen argument before the jury declared an impasse was harmless error, if it was error at alla point we do not concedebecause no argument occurred until after the jury actually declared an impasse.

We find no error by the trial court's reopening of argument.