What is the effect of the prosecutor's brief comments to the jury in a criminal case?

Defendant argues that, together, the prosecutor's argument and the jury's instruction violated his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. (Cf., Griffin v. California (1964) 380 U.S. 609, 614, 85 S.Ct. 1229, 1232-1233, 14 L.Ed.2d 106.) We are unable to agree for several reasons.

Again, defendant did not object at trial to the prosecutor's comments, and under Green it is when an appropriate objection and admonition would not have cured the harm that "the court must then and only then reach the issue whether on the whole record the harm resulted in a miscarriage of justice within the meaning of the Constitution." (People v. Green, supra, 27 Cal.3d 1, 34, 164 Cal.Rptr. 1, 609 P.2d 468.) "The reason for this rule, of course, is that 'the trial court should be given an opportunity to correct the abuse and thus, if possible, prevent by suitable instructions the harmful effect upon the minds of the jury.' (Citations.)" (Id., at p. 27, 164 Cal.Rptr. 1, 609 P.2d 468.) We are persuaded that an objection and prompt admonition would have repaired any damage resulting from the brief comments.