In People v. Bacon (2010) 50 Cal.4th 1082, the defendant was charged with murder in count 1 and accessory to murder in count 4. The court instructed the jury pursuant to CALJIC No. 8.75 (like CALCRIM No. 3517) and then gave a special instruction advising the jury the defendant could not be convicted of both murder and the crime of accessory to murder. "In order to find the defendant guilty of the crime charged in Count 4, accessory after the fact to murder, you must first unanimously find the defendant not guilty of the crime charged in Count 1, murder of the first degree, and not guilty of the lesser offense of murder of the second degree." (Bacon, at p. 1109.) The defendant argued the instructions were ambiguous and may have "'misled the jurors to believe that they were not free to order their substantive deliberations the way they saw useful or proper.'" (Id. at p. 1110.) The Supreme Court found no error because it was not reasonably likely the jury would have failed to understand they had discretion to choose the order they evaluated the charges. (Ibid.)