In what circumstances will a court grant a motion for mistrial for abuse of counsel?

A motion for mistrial should be granted " 'only when " 'a party's chances of receiving a fair trial have been irreparably damaged' " ' [citation], that is, if it is 'apprised of prejudice that it judges incurable by admonition or instruction' [citation]. 'Whether a particular incident is incurably prejudicial is by its nature a speculative matter, and the trial court is vested with considerable discretion in ruling on mistrial motions.' [Citation.]" (People v. Avila (2006) 38 Cal.4th 491, 573.) We review a trial court's ruling on a motion for mistrial for abuse of discretion. (People v. Welch (1999) 20 Cal.4th 701, 749.)

Applying these standards, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mistrial motion. Immediately after S.B.'s testimony, the court instructed the jury that the evidence regarding the writing was "totally irrelevant." The court further admonished that the jury should "disregard" the testimony in question and not allow it to "enter into your deliberations in any way." (See People v. Avila, supra, 38 Cal.4th at p. 574 [trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a mistrial motion after a witness mentioned the defendant recently got out of prison, because the court admonished the jury not to consider it for any purpose].) Each juror confirmed for the court that he or she understood and would follow the instruction, and we assume the jurors did so. (See People v. Mooc (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1216, 1234.) We find no abuse of discretion.

Page 5

The judgment is affirmed.