Does the trial court need to "sanitate" evidence to eliminate prejudicial facts?

Here, the evidence was either admissible or any error in its admission was harmless. And it is not reasonably probable that the trial court would have "sanitized" the evidence to eliminate unduly prejudicial facts because there simply were none. Because defendant cannot show prejudice, he cannot show that defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to the evidence or pursue bifurcation. (People v. Cudjo (1993) 6 Cal.4th 585, 626.)