Does a prosecutor's argument that a police officer who responded to a carjacking said that the weapon used in the first carjacked was similar to the one used during the second vehiclejacking?

Defendant also criticizes the prosecutor for making a statement during her argument that a police officer who responded to the first carjacking said that the weapon used during it looked like the ones carried in patrol cars, such as the one she was showing the jury. We note that defendant did not object to this statement, therefore he waived any objection to it. (People v. Dykes (2009) 46 Cal.4th 731, 770.) Moreover, the prosecutor misspokethe officer did not testify that the weapon looked like ones police officers have in their patrol cars. He could not have, because he was not present during the crime. Rather, he testified that the first victim had described the firearm used by the gunman in such a way that he wrote in his police report that it was a 12 gauge pump-type shotgun. The officer added that he assumed that this victim had seen the shotgun the officer carried in his patrol car but he could not recall having a conversation with the victim in which the latter compared the weapon the gunman used with the one in the officer's car.

Page 11

Defendant asserts that the prosecutor's statement during argument was prejudicial, but he fails to say how.