Does the trial court properly answer the jury's question?

We therefore turn to whether the trial court properly answered the jury's question. Doane does not contest that the instructions on flight, ordinary negligence, and gross negligence to which the court re-referred the jury were correct as originally given. And we recognize that in many situations, a court's decision to re-refer the jury to correct instructions will not constitute an abuse of discretion under section 1138. (See Dykes , supra , 46 Cal.4th at p. 802, 95 Cal.Rptr.3d 78, 209 P.3d 1 ; see also People v. Beardslee (1991) 53 Cal.3d 68, 97, 279 Cal.Rptr. 276, 806 P.2d 1311 ["comments diverging from the standard [instructions] are often risky"].) But the question at issue suggested that the jury misunderstood the governing law, and we are not convinced that merely re-referring to instructions already given in such a circumstance is adequate to " clear up any instructional confusion [the jury] expressed. " ( Dykes , at p. 802, 95 Cal.Rptr.3d 78, 209 P.3d 1.)