What is the test for a claim of Prosecutorial Misconduct?

In any event, the claim must be rejected at the threshold. It is, of course, "the general rule that questions relating to the admissibility of evidence will not be reviewed on appeal in the absence of a specific and timely objection in the trial [749 P.2d 843] court on the ground sought to be urged on appeal." (People v. Rogers (1978) 21 Cal.3d 542, 548, 146 Cal.Rptr. 732, [44 Cal.3d 649] 579 P.2d 1048, and cases cited.) Here, defense counsel made no objection whatever. Defendant's argument to the contrary is without merit. What he puts forth as an objection on the part of defense counsel was merely his request to continue closing argument in the face of what he called defendant's "bombshell" confession.

E. Prosecutorial Misconduct

Defendant contends that the prosecutor engaged in prejudicial misconduct in violation of the principles of People v. Murtishaw (1981) 29 Cal.3d 733, 175 Cal.Rptr. 738, 631 P.2d 446, when in his rebuttal to defense counsel's closing argument he made a comment going to the issue of "further dangerousness."