In what circumstances have defense counsel for defendant Salas been able to cross-examine the evidence of additional instances of cooperation in criminal activity?

Defense counsel for Salas immediately pointed out on recross-examination that these additional instances of cooperation in criminal activity did not involve violent crime, but rather nonviolent conduct, such as vandalism. Further, we note defense counsel makes no attempt to demonstrate how this testimony in any way prejudiced the defense. Defendants simply argue Littlefield "testified about his 'new discoveries' at trial" and "[h]is testimony went to the crux of [defendants'] defense." But defendants fail to explain what "new discoveries" were testified to at trial or how this information prejudiced the defense. Thus, we cannot find any prejudice. (See People v. Verdugo (2010) 50 Cal.4th 263, 281-282.)