What is the test for establishing that a state law error was not a factor in the conviction of a defendant?

conviction a denial of due process. (People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 819.)" (People v. Cortez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 101, 130.) Defendant has not shown that the prosecutor misstated any law or urged the jurors to acquiesce to higher judicial authority. He has not demonstrated that the prosecutor engaged in a pattern of egregious conduct resulting in a fundamentally unfair trial. (Cf. People v. Hill, supra, 17 Cal.4th at p. 815 [prosecutor's conduct "outrageous and pervasive"], 821 [prosecutor engaged in a "constant barrage" of "unethical conduct"], 845 [prosecutor engaged in "pervasive campaign to mislead the jury on key legal points" and "unceasing denigration of defense counsel before the jury"], 847 [cumulative impact of prosecutor's misconduct during the guilt and penalty phases of the trial and other errors deprived defendant of a fair trial].) Defendant has failed to establish that his trial was rendered fundamentally unfair and he was deprived of his right to due process.

10. Any State Law Error was Harmless