What is the test for prejudicial misconduct in the context of comments made by a prosecutor to the jury in a criminal case?

In any event, we conclude the prosecutor's remarks did not amount to prejudicial misconduct. "A prosecutor's conduct violates the federal Constitution when it 'infects the trial with such unfairness as to make the conviction a denial of due process.' [Citations.] In other words, the misconduct must be 'of sufficient significance to result in the denial of the defendant's right to a fair trial.' [Citation.] A prosecutor's conduct that does not render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair violates California law only if it involves the use of deceptive or reprehensible methods to attempt to persuade either the court or the jury. [Citation.] [] Even when misconduct has been established, 'it "must bear a reasonable possibility of influencing the penalty verdict. [Citations.] In evaluating a claim of prejudicial misconduct based upon a prosecutor's comments to the jury, we decide whether there is a reasonable possibility that the jury construed or applied the prosecutor's comments in an objectionable manner." ' [Citation.] At the same time, we bear in mind that prosecutors 'have wide latitude to discuss and draw inferences from the evidence at trial,' and whether 'the inferences the prosecutor draws are reasonable is for the jury to decide.' " (People v. Ervine (2009) 47 Cal.4th 745, 805-806.)

Page 12