This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.
When a criminal trial involves experts who disagree with each other, the judge normally follows a set order for presenting evidence. This rule lets the judge change that order if it will help the jury understand the expert testimony better.
The judge can only do this if both sides agree to it. For example, instead of having each side present all of its evidence separately, the judge might allow the experts to testify back to back so the jury can compare what they say more easily. The goal is to make complicated expert opinions easier for jurors to follow and weigh against each other.
This rule gives the judge some flexibility, but it does not force either side to accept a different order of proof. If the prosecution or the defense objects, the judge cannot use this option and must stick to the usual way of presenting evidence at trial.
