What constitutes prosecutor misconduct in a criminal case?

" 'Prosecutorial misconduct implies the use of deceptive or reprehensible methods to attempt to persuade either the court or the jury. [Citation.]' " (People v. Haskett (1982) 30 Cal.3d 841, 866, 180 Cal.Rptr. 640, 640 P.2d 776.) Inasmuch as there is no indication the prosecutor approached the bench for the purpose of disclosing prejudicial information to the jury or deliberately spoke in abnormally loud tones, his acts cannot reasonably be characterized as misconduct. There remains the question, however, whether defendant nevertheless was entitled to a mistrial.

It is clear the dismissal of felony charges without a trial on the merits is an extreme sanction against the People. (People v. Mills (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 302, 308, 151 Cal.Rptr. 71.) Accordingly, where the granting of a mistrial will lead to that result, it should be granted only if the court is apprised of prejudice which it judges is incurable by admonition or instruction. [199 Cal.App.3d 1311] ( People v. Haskett, supra, 30 Cal.3d at p. 854, 180 Cal.Rptr. 640, 640 P.2d 776.) That question is, by nature, speculative; hence, the trial court is vested with considerable discretion in ruling on a motion for mistrial. (Ibid.)