What is the test for a claim of prosecutorial misconduct?

"To preserve for appeal a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, the defense must make a timely objection at trial and request an admonition; otherwise, the point is reviewable only if an admonition would not have cured the harm caused by the misconduct. [Citation.]" (People v. Price (1991) 1 Cal.4th 324, 447, superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in People v. Hinks (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1157, 1161-1165.)

"A prosecutor's conduct violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution when it infects the trial with such unfairness as to make the conviction a denial of due process. Conduct by a prosecutor that does not render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair is prosecutorial misconduct under state law only if it involves the use of deceptive or reprehensible methods to attempt to persuade either the trial court or the jury." (People v. Morales (2001) 25 Cal.4th 34, 44.) Acts of prosecutorial misconduct do not justify the reversal of a conviction "unless it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the defendant would have been reached without the misconduct. [Citation.]" (People v. Crew (2003) 31 Cal.4th 822, 839.)

Initially, we note that it is misconduct to appeal to the passion and prejudice of the jurors. (People v. Mayfield(1997) 14 Cal.4th 668, 803.)

Page 26

"When an appellant bases a prosecutorial misconduct claim on the prosecutor's arguments to the jury, we consider how a reasonable juror would or could have understood the statement in the context of the entire argument. [Citation.] No misconduct exists if a juror would have taken the statement to state or imply nothing harmful. [Citation.]" (People v. Szadziewicz (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 823, 839.)