Is there any case law where a defendant objected to the testimony of a mental health expert at trial?

Defendant did not object to either the question or the answer. He now claims the testimony violated section 29, which prohibits expert testimony as to "whether the defendant had or did not have the required mental states . . . for the crimes charged." Although defendant made a general objection to the admission of gang evidence prior to trial, this was insufficient to preserve this claim. (Evid. Code, 353; see People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690, 717.) In any event, the claim lacks merit.