What impact would the result have had on the outcome of a criminal case if defense counsel had objected to any or all instances of prosecutorial misconduct at trial?

In light of the likely minimal impact of the prosecutorial misconduct, the overwhelming evidence of appellant's guilt, and the prophylactic jury instructions, we conclude it is not reasonably probable the result would have been different if defense counsel had objected to any or all of the instances of prosecutorial misconduct at trial. Since there was no prejudice, we need go no further to determine that appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must fail. (See Strickland v. Washington, supra, 466 U.S. at p. 694.)