What is the test for a finding of bad faith against a prosecutor who uses deceptive or reprehensible methods to persuade the jury to convict a defendant?

" "A prosecutor who uses deceptive or reprehensible methods to persuade the jury commits misconduct, and such actions require reversal under the federal Constitution when they infect the trial with such "unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process." " [Citation.] "Under state law, a prosecutor who uses such methods commits misconduct even when those actions do not result in a fundamentally unfair trial." [Citation.] ... Prosecutorial misconduct can result in reversal under state law if there was a reasonable likelihood of a more favorable verdict in the absence of the challenged conduct and under federal law if the misconduct was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. " ( People v. Rivera (2019) 7 Cal.5th 306, 333334, 247 Cal.Rptr.3d 363, 441 P.3d 359.) A showing of bad faith is not required to establish prosecutorial misconduct; "the term prosecutorial misconduct is somewhat of a misnomer to the extent that it suggests a prosecutor must act with a culpable state of mind. A more apt description of the transgression is prosecutorial error." ( People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 823, fn. 1, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 656, 952 P.2d 673.)

[64 Cal.App.5th 1145]

" As a general rule a defendant may not complain on appeal of prosecutorial misconduct unless in a timely fashionand on the same groundthe defendant made an assignment of misconduct and requested that the jury be admonished to disregard the impropriety. " ( People v. Prieto (2003) 30 Cal.4th 226, 259, 133 Cal.Rptr.2d 18, 66 P.3d 1123.) " [O]nly if an admonition would not have cured the harm is the claim of misconduct preserved for review. " ( People v. Friend (2009) 47 Cal.4th 1, 29, 97 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 211 P.3d 520.)

[279 Cal.Rptr.3d 721]