Can a prosecutor who described the defense case as "ludicrous," "contrived" and "bogus" in his arguments to the jury use improper or improper language?

In his arguments to the jury, the prosecutor described the defense case as "ludicrous," "contrived," "concocted," and "bogus." Defendant asserts these descriptions were improper because they were "personal attacks on the integrity of opposing counsel." (People v. Espinoza (1992) 3 Cal.4th 806, 820, 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 682, 838 P.2d 204.) Having reviewed the remarks in their proper context, we disagree. The remarks were comments on the evidence presented by the defense and did not impugn counsel's integrity.