What is the difference between the prosecutor and appellant in their argument that there is an objective test to reduce murder to the second degree?

To be sure, the result might have been different if the prosecutor had argued that an objective test applied to reduce murder from first to second degree. (See People v. Guiton (1993) 4 Cal.4th 1116, 11281129, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 365, 847 P.2d 45 [prejudice might be inferred where two alternative bases of guilt were presented to jury, one valid and the other not, and prosecutor stressed the latter].) This takes us to the third reason we disagree with appellant's argument: appellant did not rely on provocation at trial. In fact, as we next discuss, provocation was scarcely mentioned at all.