If there was a timely objection, would the court have issued a curative admonition reminding the jury to follow its instructions and not the attorneys' arguments?

Moreover, even had there been a timely objection, the court likely would have given a curative admonition reminding jurors to follow its instructions and not the attorneys' arguments in the event of a conflict. Defendant does not suggest this would have been ineffective to remedy any perceived harm. (See People v. Tate (2010) 49 Cal.4th 635, 693 [curative admonition was adequate to cure harm from misconduct].) Indeed, the prosecutor reminded the jury of this obligation during rebuttal by stating, "What we say in our closing arguments, as the judge instructed you, is not evidence. It's

Page 8