What are the findings of the California Court of Appeal on the jury's deliberations for the lesser included charge of gross vehicular manslaughter?

Defendant next contends the court erroneously instructed the jury on how it could consider the greater and lesser included offenses. Defendant complains that CALCRIM No. 3517, on the deliberations for lesser included offenses, merely advised the jury on how to fill in the relevant verdict forms, and failed to comply with the requirements of People v. Dewberry (1959) 51 Cal.2d 548 (Dewberry) on reasonable doubt and how to choose between the greater and lesser offenses. Defendant acknowledges he was found not guilty of the greater offense of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, and guilty of the lesser offense of vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, but argues the instructions prevented the jury from considering the other lesser included offenses, particularly vehicular manslaughter.