Is a jury still likely to find the special circumstance allegation true on the basis appellant was a major participant in the crime but was not the actual shooter?

It is also probable one or more jurors found the special circumstance allegation true on the basis appellant was a major participant in the crimes but was not the actual shooter. This time instructions on appellant's potential culpability as an indirect participant were requested by the prosecution when the jury indicated it was hung during deliberations. At this point closing arguments had concluded and thus neither side had an opportunity to address this additional theory in closing arguments. The question remains whether "counsel's closing argument was prejudicially affected thereby," that is whether appellant "was unfairly prevented from arguing his [ ] defense to the jury or was substantially misled in formulating and presenting arguments." (United States v. Gaskins, supra, 849 F.2d at p. 458.)