Does a prosecutor's argument that a defendant failed to introduce material evidence constitute prejudicial misconduct?

Defendant argues that the prosecutor's argument quoted above amounted to prejudicial misconduct, because the prosecutor impermissibly argued that defendant failed to introduce evidence that the court had in fact excluded on the prosecutor's motion. " 'The applicable federal and state standards regarding prosecutorial misconduct are well established. " 'A prosecutor's . . . intemperate behavior violates the federal Constitution when it comprises a pattern of conduct "so egregious that it infects the trial with such unfairness as to make the conviction a denial of due process." ' " [Citations.] Conduct by a prosecutor that does not render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair is prosecutorial misconduct under state law only if it involves " ' "the use of deceptive or reprehensible methods to attempt to persuade either the court or the jury." ' " [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 819.) However, it is not misconduct for a prosecutor to comment on the defense's failure to introduce material evidence or to

Page 17