How have the courts dealt with an allegation of prejudicial misconduct in the closing argument?

Appellant claims prejudicial misconduct of the District Attorney in his closing argument. Only twice an objection was made during this argument, both times on the ground that facts were stated which were allegedly not in evidence. At one of these occasions the facts stated were found to be in evidence and this point is not brought out on appeal. In the other the jury was duly admonished. Otherwise there was no assignment of misconduct or request for an instruction to disregard. There is no contention that any of the misconduct now asserted was of such character that it could not have been cured by any admonition. Moreover we have found all misconduct urged completely unfounded and harmless or at any rate such that admonition could have sufficiently cured it. It is then no basis for reversal. People v. Simon, 107 Cal.App.2d 105, 125, 236 P.2d 855.