What is the test for a motion for a mistrial where a defendant raises the issue of improper statements to the jury?

is that "the trial court should be given an opportunity to correct the abuse and thus, if possible, prevent by suitable instructions the harmful effect upon the minds of the jury." [Citation.]" (People v. Seumanu, supra, 61 Cal.4th at p. 1341, 192 Cal.Rptr.3d 195, 355 P.3d 384.) Unlike in Adams, defendant here raised the issue before defense closing arguments began, thus providing the trial court with an opportunity to admonish the jury prior to the start of deliberations. Moreover, defendant's objections were specific enough for the trial court to craft suitable corrective instructions. Although neither their form nor their timing was ideal, defendant's objections to statements (7) through (10) by way of a motion for a mistrial put the court on notice that misconduct was alleged in time for the court to instruct the jury and correct any error. Accordingly

[365 P.3d 294]

, defendant has forfeited his challenge to statement (6) and preserved his challenges to statements (7) through (10).