Does a prosecutor have to cross-examine a defendant on cross-examination?

Moreover, as noted, the trial court sustained many of defendant's objections, implying to the jury that the form of the prosecutor's questions was inappropriate. Further, when instructing the jury prior to deliberations, the trial court instructed it that "[n]othing that the attorneys say is evidence" and that "their questions are not evidence." Additionally, the court charged the jury to ignore questions for the attorneys if the questions were objected to and the objection sustained as well as to ignore any resulting answer if the answer was stricken. We presume the jury understood and followed these instructions. (People v. Archer (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 197, 204.) We thus find defendant suffered no prejudice from the prosecutor's cross-examination.