Is there any abuse of discretion in denying a motion for mistrial based on the victim impact evidence?

Defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion for mistrial based on the victim impact evidence. ( People v. Cox (2003) 30 Cal.4th 916, 953, 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 272, 70 P.3d 277 [denial of mistrial motion is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard].) He points to the grave vandalism testimony and the videotape montage as constituting incurably prejudicial evidence that required a mistrial. Having found no reversible error in the admission of the victim impact evidence, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of defendant's motion for mistrial based on that evidence.

Defense counsel requested the jury be instructed that [e]vidence has been introduced

[320 P.3d 789]