What is the impact of the fact that appellant fled from the police and fired at the police?

We start by taking note of what the jury was told about the case. At the beginning of jury selection, the trial court informed the jury that: (1) appellant and the codefendant were accused of committing a "street gang murder" of two individuals; (2) the murders were carried out with a handgun; and (3) the murders were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. Given what the jury already knew about the charges, the fact that appellant fled from the police and fired at them would not invariably cause a reasonable juror to automatically convict him of murder. No one was injured in the incident and, as far as the jury was told, defendant ultimately surrendered peacefully. It is difficult to imagine that the uncharged crime was as capable of evoking an irrational emotional response as the substantive charges, and counsel had an ample opportunity to explore the jurors' attitudes regarding homicide. As the trial court's refusal to allow the requested questioning did not render appellant's trial fundamentally unfair, the court did not abuse its considerable discretion by barring counsel from asking jurors to prejudge the impact of appellant's pre-arrest conduct. (People v. Stewart, supra, 33 Cal.4th at p. 458.)